Social-topical adaptive networking (stan) system allowing for cooperative inter-coupling with external social networking systems and other content sources

ABSTRACT

A cross-pollination subsystem is provided within a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN) system. The cross-pollination subsystem cooperatively interacts with external platforms to bring fresh cross-pollination data to topic nodes or on-topic Notes Exchange rings (TCONE&#39;s) of the STAN system. Users are provided with an interface that allows them to browse through the cross-pollinated topic space to thereby connect with online content sources that are likely to correspond to topics of interest currently on the minds of the STAN system users.

1. FIELD OF DISCLOSURE

The present disclosure of invention relates generally to onlinenetworking systems and uses thereof. The disclosure relates morespecifically to social networking (SN) systems and in particular tocases where one or more social-topical networking (STN) systems arecooperatively coupled to other kinds of online networking and/or contentproviding systems.

2A. CROSS REFERENCE TO CO-OWNED APPLICATION

The following copending U.S. patent application is owned by the owner ofthe present application, and its disclosure is incorporated herein byreference in its entirety as originally filed:

(A) Ser. No. 12/369,274 filed Feb. 11, 2009 by Jeffrey A. Rapaport etal. and which is originally entitled, Social Network Driven IndexingSystem for Instantly Clustering People with Concurrent Focus on SameTopic into On Topic Chat Rooms and/or for Generating On-topic SearchResults Tailored to User Preferences Regarding Topic.

2B. CROSS REFERENCE TO PATENTS/PUBLICATIONS

The disclosures of the following U.S. patents or Published U.S. patentapplications are incorporated herein by reference:

(A) U.S. Pat. App. 2008/0,065,468 A1, published Mar. 13, 2008 on behalfof Berg; Charles John; et al. and entitled “Methods for MeasuringEmotive Response and Selection Preference”.

3. DEFINITIONS

As used herein, the terms “software”, “software agent”, “BOT”, “virtualBOT”, “virtual agent”, and the like do not mean a purely nonphysicalabstraction. Claims appended hereto which use terms such as “software”,“software agent”, “BOT”, “virtual BOT”, “virtual agent”, and the like donot preclude others from thinking about, speaking about or similarlynon-usefully using abstract ideas, laws of nature or naturally occurringphenomenon. When in an active (e.g., an executing) mode, a “software”entity, be it a BOT, a spyware program or the alike is understood to bea physical ongoing process being carried out in one or more realphysical machines where the machine(s) entropically consume(s)electrical power and/or other forms of real energy per unit time as aconsequence of said physical ongoing process being carried out therewithin. When in a static (e.g., non-executing) mode, an instantiated“software” entity, be it an instantiated BOT, instantiated spywareprogram or the alike is understood to be embodied as a substantiallyunique and functionally operative pattern of transformed physical matterpreserved in a more than elusively transitory manner in one or morephysical memory devices so that it can functionally cooperative interactwith a software instructable machine as opposed to being merelydescriptive and nonfunctional matter, where the one or more physicalmemory devices include, but not limited to, memory devices which utilizeelectrostatic effects to represent stored data, memory devices whichutilize magnetic effects to represent stored data, memory devices whichutilize magnetic and/or other phase change effects to represent storeddata, memory devices which utilize optical and/or other phase changeeffects to represent stored data, and so on.

As used herein, the terms, “signaling”, “transmitting”, “informing”“indicating”, “logical linking”, and the like do not mean purelynonphysical and abstract events but rather physical and not elusivelytransitory events where the former physical events are ones whoseexistence can be verified by modern scientific techniques. Claimsappended hereto that use the aforementioned terms, “signaling”,“transmitting”, “informing”, “indicating”, “logical linking”, and thelike or their equivalents do not preclude others from thinking about,speaking about or similarly using in a non-useful way abstract ideas,laws of nature or naturally occurring phenomenon.

BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF RELATED TECHNOLOGY

The above identified and herein incorporated by reference U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 12/369,274 (filed Feb. 11, 2009) discloses a typeof Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN) System (hereafter, alsoreferred to as “Sierra#1” and “STAN_(—)1”) which enables isolated onlineusers of a network (or even strangers at a social gathering, e.g., alarge business conference) to automatically join with one another(electronically or otherwise). The joinder may occur at times when theyare in the mood to do so (to join in a so-called Notes Exchange session)and when they have roughly concurrent focus on same or similar contentand/or when they have approximately concurrent interest in a same orsimilar particular topic or topics and/or when they have currentpersonality co-compatibility for instantly chatting with, or forotherwise exchanging information with one another in short order online(or even in person) and for example with regard to the content and/ortopic of shared current focus or with regard simply to a likelihood thatthey have current personality co-compatibility for instantly chattingonline (or even in person) with each other and potentially developingfocus on a particular topic of common interest. Because the networksystem (STAN_(—)1) disclosed in Ser. No. 12/369,274 operates toadaptively change a topics defining map thereof (which has physicallyrepresented topic nodes or the like defined by recorded data signals)according to changing moods of user populations as well as individualusers (e.g., user mood or other current user persona), it may bereferred to as a Social-Topical ‘Adaptive’ Networking (STAN) system.

In the case where two or more online users join (make contact) with oneanother (e.g., electronically) based on commonality of topic(s) ofconcurrent interest, the joint activity between the users may be termedas “Social-Topical Networking” (STN). In one embodiment, the place forsuch an over-the-line exchange of notes may be termed as a “TCONE”(Topic Center Owned Notes Exchange), which terminology will beelucidated on below as being directed to a physical meeting mechanismsuch as an online chat room where that room is primarily “owned” by atopic defining mechanism known as a topic node or a topic center (TC).The STAN-mediated or in-TCONE activity can be differentiated fromconventional “Social Networking” (SN). In the conventional form ofsocial networking (SN), instantiation of a private dialog often requiresthe existence of a pre-defined and pre-recorded “buddies” list or“accepted friends” list or “accepted contacts” list before participantscan join electronically and privately with one another on a spur ofmoment and in a so-called, online discussion group to discuss nopre-ordained topic in particular. In other words, in the conventionalform of social networking (SN), there is no system-driven automatedmechanism for defining Topic Centers (TC's, also referred to herein as‘Topic Nodes’) and for generating adaptive association data wherein aprivate or public Social Notes Exchange (SNE) is primarily “owned” by afirst topic center but may adaptively drift so as to be primarily ownedby a different TC if and when, for example, theelectronically-facilitated exchange of notes (or of other data) driftsonto a different or narrower or broader topic.

As those skilled in the art of conventional online social networking(SN) will appreciate, the so-called “accepted friends” list is anoperative part of the widely-used FaceBook™ online system. Similarly,the “buddies” list is an operative part of the earlier developed AOL™Instant Messaging (AIM™) system. A similar mechanism exists in the alsowell-known, MySpace™ SN system and LinkedIn™ system. In these mentionedexamples there are pre-defined “friends”, “buddies”, vouched-for“contacts” listed on co-mutual and pre-recorded friend/buddy permissionlists. Based on the current permission settings, one friend/buddy may beallowed to (or not, if he/she has been “de-friended”) joinelectronically for a “private” conversation (e.g., a “behind the(privacy) wall” conversation) with another friend/buddy for an onlinechat or an alike online social interaction that has no pre-ordainedtopic in particular to be discussed.

By contrast, according to one aspect of the “Social-Topical Networking”(STN) approach disclosed in the here incorporated “STAN_(—)1” patentapplication (Ser. No. 12/369,274), people who are substantiallystrangers to each other rather than being pre-recorded as “buddies” or“friends” or known “contacts” may nonetheless meet electronically (orotherwise) and privately or semi-privately (where ‘semi-privacy’ may bedue to constraints on who and how many can enter an STNE (Social-TopicalNotes Exchange)) for a mutually beneficial exchange based onmachine-determined mutuality of a concurrent topic of interest (TOI) aswell as based on other filtering criteria (e.g., overlap of chatco-compatibilities, of expertise requirements, etc.). In one embodiment,the STAN_(—)1 system automatically invites co-compatible strangers (butthey could be friends as well) to privately or semi-privately meet uponline with one another. The system may be viewed as one that providesreal time “in-STAN-vitations”™ to plural people based on mutuality of aconcurrent topic of interest (as guessed at by automated means of theSTAN_(—)1 system) and usually based on overlap of current content beingfocused upon by them and possibly based on a number of other invitationfiltering criteria (e.g., co-compatibility to now chat with one another,level of expertise, trustworthiness, etc.).

The above identified and herein incorporated U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 12/369,274 (filed Feb. 11, 2009) (“STAN_(—)1”) also provides asone embodiment thereof, a cloud computing system that evolves with use(in other words, it is adaptive) so as to provide real time changing,topic indexing trees having hierarchically interconnected nodes (topicnodes, which terminology is herein used interchangeably with theterminology, topic centers or TC's) representing both broad and narrowertopics of interest of STAN_(—)1 users, where the configuration of thetree can change adaptively and dynamically in response to real timereactions of the STAN_(—)1 system users to online or otherwise shareablecontent they are detected to be focusing upon as well as newcontributions by STAN_(—)1 system users. Real time reactions of theSTAN_(—)1 system users are determined in one embodiment by means ofuploaded, Current Focus indicating record signals (CFi's) and CurrentVote indicating record signals (CVi's). In one embodiment, nodes of theSTAN_(—)1-maintained topic-nodes tree correspond to topics in adynamically changing topics space and the nodes link to on-topicprivate, semi-private or public chat rooms (in other words, to gatheredgroups of on-topic focusing users) and/or to on-topic other contentsources. If a logged-in user connects to a first topic node within theSTAN_(—)1 tree, he (or she) can then use the tree hierarchy structure tonavigate to nearby parent, child or sibling topic nodes so as to thenconnect (via logical linking) through those other nodes to furthercontent that is sourced through those other topic nodes. Over-the-lineconversations (SNE's) that are monitored by the STAN_(—)1 system (usingthe CFi, CVi mechanism) can drift from one topic node to another as thecentral topic of the respective conversation drifts. In one embodiment,participants in the conversation can vote implicitly or explicitly onwhich one or more STAN_(—)1 topic nodes the conversation shouldprimarily belong to and if so, to what degree of linkage. A STAN_(—)1system tracked Notes Exchange session (e.g., chat room session) canswing in Tarzan-like style from being primarily logical linked(tethered) to one topic node and then a next and yet another one.

In one variation, the STAN_(—)1 system assumes that all its users willbe logged-in (registered and STAN_(—)1-tracked via CFi's or CVi's) intothe STAN_(—)1 cloud computing system. In one variation, the STAN_(—)1system assumes that most in-STAN_(—)1 users will be using on-topic chatrooms sponsored by, entry-wise controlled by and tracked by theSTAN_(—)1 system (in other words, persistently ties to a STAN_(—)1maintained topic node) to interact with one another and to gain accessto on-topic content sourced through the on-topic chat room or through atopic node with which the chat room is logically associated (logicallyassociated by association data stored and maintained by the STAN_(—)1system).

However, the Internet is a vast network of many different kinds ofcomputerized networks and content sources, used by a vast number ofdifferent people and thus the Internet can be hosting numeroustopic-directed exchanges (e.g., tweets, emails, social games, Gmails™,GoogleWaves™, GoogleBuzz(es)™, Google Social Search(es)™,FriendFeed(s)™, blogs, Wikipedia™ posts and discussions, Stumbles™,ClearSpring™ shares, Yelps™, list-serves, etc.) and these can beproviding numerous on-topic content sources and/or on-topic notesexchanging sessions where a bulk of these lie outside of the finite setof STAN_(—)1 sponsored chats being tracked by, controlled by, andindexed (in its topics tree) by the STAN_(—)1 cloud computingenvironment. For example, registered users of a social networking systemknown as LinkedIn™ can spontaneously form Groups and then formDiscussion threads under Discussion Group Domains. The discussions whichtake place in the LinkedIn™ Discussion threads space (where LinkedIn™ ishere mentioned merely as an illustrative example) may by happenstanceco-relate to broad or narrow topics being simultaneously covered bySTAN_(—)1-sponsored chat rooms. It may be mutually beneficial for usersof the heretofore separate systems (e.g., the STAN_(—)1 system and theLinkedIn™ system) to learn of one another's existence and of theirconcurrent interest in a specific common topic and it may be mutuallybeneficial for them to join into larger or re-shuffled group exchangesof information, opinions and so forth about the common topic of interestunder the auspices of either one or both of a Social-Topical AdaptiveNetworking (such as the STAN_(—)2 system disclosed herein) and/or a moreconventional social networking (SN) system such as that of a vintageyear 2009 FaceBook™, MySpace™ or LinkedIn™ system. The here givenexample of on-topic Notes Exchange sessions occurring within LinkedIn™discussion groups is understood to be non-limiting. On-topic NotesExchange sessions may take place in online role playing and/or socialnetworking games such as SecondLife™ and the like wherein, despite thefact that role-playing characters or avatars are portrayed as animatedbeings, the information output by and exchanged between such playercharacters is controlled by character-driving human beings.

It is to be understood that this background of technology section isintended to provide useful background for understanding the heredisclosed inventive technology and as such, the technology backgroundsection may and probably does include ideas, concepts or recognitionsthat were not part of what was known or appreciated by those skilled inthe pertinent art prior at corresponding invention dates of inventedsubject matter disclosed herein. As such, this background of technologysection is not to be construed as an admission regarding what is or isnot prior art.

SUMMARY

In accordance with one aspect of the present disclosure,cross-pollination (CP) is provided manually and/or automatically asbetween two or more social networking (SN) systems where at least one ofthe systems is a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN) system. Thecross-pollination may be of a kind that improves, expands, advances orhelps to evolve one or more of: (a) user-to-user associations (U2U)regarding common topics of interests, (b) user-to-topic associations(U2T—in both directions; so therefore topic-to-user as well), (c)topic-to-topic associations (T2T) and (d) topic-to-content associations(T2C—in both directions) as may be provided by cooperative exchanges ofinformation allowed between the two or more social networking (SN)systems.

More specifically, in accordance with a first aspect of the presentdisclosure, techniques are provided for causing one or more of thefollowing machine-implemented processes to take place: (a) an automatedsoftware agent (a ‘BOT’) automatically brings from out in the‘untracked/unmonitored’ field and to a so-called STAN_(—)2 system, aproposed-content package (a pCPD package) containing for example,hyperlinks (e.g., URL's) to potentially on-topic content that exists inan external platform but which probably co-relate to current topics ofone or more topic centers (TC's) defined by and maintained as storeddata signals in a topic space of the STAN_(—)2 system; (b) the relevanceof the BOT-brought content (as linked to or carried by theproposed-content package) to the topic of the TC (or to the specifictopic of a TC-owned, TCONE) is voted on by in-node users (or by thein-TCONE users) and/or by an automated content-intake filteringmechanism of the TC or TCONE such that the most relevant-to-topiccontent of the pCPD package (or relevant-to-TCONE content) is logicallyabsorbed into and logically positioned (ranked as being) as being closerto a core center point of the topic center (TC) or of the TCONE and suchthat less relevant-to-topic content of the pCPD package is eitherrejected or logically positioned (ranked) farther away from the node'sor TCONE's core center point; (c) the ranking of most to leastrelevant-to-topic content is repeatedly updated over time as thepopulation of in-node users (or in-TCONE users) changes and as newerBOT-brought content is proposed for addition to the on-topic node and itis voted on (ranked) for corresponding rejection or acceptance andlogical positioning within the TC or TCONE; (d) STAN_(—)2 users who arecurrently focusing upon a given topic (which focus is in one embodimentdetermined automatically and in the background by machine-implementedprocesses) preferably do not navigate directly to a content-supplyingone URL but instead they navigate to the on-topic STAN_(—)2 node (topiccenter or TC) which has been cross-pollinated with the freshest on-topiccross-pollinating content packages and the topic center (TC) is thenused as a logical linking source for conveying the latest on-topiccontent (including on-topic dialogs) to those STAN_(—)2 users who areinterested in learning the latest about the corresponding topic. TheSTAN_(—)2 users typically enter as participants into a TCONE (topiccenter owned note exchange, e.g., chat room) whose entry criterion(e.g., level of expertise) closely matches their current status (e.g.,current level of expertise).

As alluded to above, the current topic of interest of a given user maybe determined automatically and in the background by one or moremachine-implemented processes which attempt to reduce ambiguity as towhich specific topic the user is most probably now thinking about(consciously or subconsciously) by gathering and processing (e.g.,competitively ranking) a dynamic flow of so-called “encodings” whichencodings can provide contextual clues as to what the user is mostlikely thinking to be his or her current topic of interest. An exampleof one “encoding” in a stream of encodings can be a single keyword thatthe user appears to be intensely and primarily physically focusing upon(e.g., with his/her eyes) at the moment. Another example of an“encoding” in a stream of other kinds of encodings can be a facialgrimace or other significant facial expression (as defined for exampleby the user's active PEEP record—the user's pre-recorded PersonalEmotion Expression Profile) that an automated facial expressionsdetection sub-system of the here disclosed STAN_(—)2 system picks up ashaving been made by that user in conjunction with his physicallyfocusing upon a primary keyword encoding.

Suppose for example that the primary keyword of focus is the one word,“bridge”. Suppose the user is determined by the machine system to havesignificantly raised an eyebrow in conjunction with this intenselyfocused upon primary keyword. However, even with those twodeterminations as givens, a term like “bridge” can be highly ambiguous.What specific version of “bridge” is the user thinking about and perhapsraising an eyebrow over? Is it a card game called “bridge’? Is it a roadstructure that crosses over a river, a room on board a ship from wherethe ship's captain commands, a portion of the human nose, some othernoun that qualifies as “bridge” or perhaps none of the above and insteadthe verb sense of “bridge” or its adjective sense (e.g., bridge loan)?

More peculiarly, what if “bridge” at this moment means a magical kind ofbridge that has one end thereof connected to the given user and theother end extending through a fog to unseen shores but nonethelessautomatically swinging to connect to content and/or people which/who arehighly relevant to a topic the given user is currently thinking about?What if this magic bridge has a pushbutton at the user's end that says“Bring it on”? What if the given user merely has to provide a singleprimary keyword and then simply press the single magical button (“Bringit on”) at his end of the “bridge” and then in response, the magic“bridge” automatically conveys a stream of informational traffic to thegiven user where that stream puts the user into virtual contact withon-topic content and/or with co-compatible people who are now exchangingdiscussion or other forms of signaled notes (also referred to herein asNotes Exchange session) on the same topic the user intended when hesupplied his end of the magical bridge with the one primary keyword(e.g., “bridge”) and then pressed the “Bring it on” pushbutton?

In accordance with the present disclosure, an automated machine system(e.g., the STAN_(—)2 system) is provided that automatically seeks to dosomething like that. However the here disclosed machine system does notoperate by magic. Instead it automatically tries to disambiguateambiguous first encodings (e.g., a primary keyword such as “bridge) bytrying to collect additional and/or substantially contemporaneousfurther “encodings” that give more context to one or more primary, butoften ambiguous encodings (e.g., the exemplary primary keyword,“bridge). The disambiguating other encodings may be automaticallycollected signals that indicate where the given user is in terms oftime, space, planning and/or perhaps emotional moods. In one embodiment,a continuous flow of encodings surrounding the user either physicallyand/or logically are persistently being collected and analyzed by theSTAN_(—)2 system (when so-called “monitoring” is turned on) for thepurpose of reducing or eliminating the ambiguity as to which specifictopic the user currently has in mind (consciously or subconsciously).The persistently collected other “encodings” may include identificationsof on-screen or off-screen other information that appears currently orin recent usage history of the user (in the dynamic flow of the user'srecent life) to be correlated to current primary encodings (e.g., to theprimary keyword, “bridge”). These additional encodings can help placethe primary keyword(s) (e.g., “bridge”) in better context for themachine system and can thus enable the automated machine system (theSTAN_(—)2 system) to appear as if it has intuitively guessed what was onthe user's mind without subjecting the user to an endless list ofambiguity reducing questions.

More specifically, and by way of a first example, suppose the heredescribed system (the STAN_(—)2 system) automatically acquires from theuser's in-hand, personal data processing device (e.g., his GPS-enabled,Apple iPhone™) a signal indicating he is currently located atcoordinates (including altitude and/or building floor number) matchingthose of owned properties of a branch office of a banking company.Suppose the here described STAN_(—)2 system also automatically acquiresfrom the user's personal data processing device (e.g., his iPhone™) asecond signal indicating that his iPhone™ is in close proximity (e.g., 6feet or less away) from an information-sharing second personal computer(could also be an iPhone™) that reports itself to belong to a loanofficer of the bank's. Suppose the here described STAN_(—)2 system alsoautomatically determines that it is 10:00 AM on a Monday morning (forthe user) and the STAN_(—)2 system further automatically acquires from ameeting-calendaring file of the user that he was scheduled to meet witha bank loan officer on this Monday morning to negotiate a bridge loanfor his business.

All these contextually enriching and automatically collected encodingsacquired by the STAN_(—)2 system increase the probability that theprimary keyword, “bridge”, if so presented by that user at that time andplace to his personal data processing device (e.g., his palm-heldcomputer phone) is intended to mean that the user is thinking about a“bridge loan” and not about a bridge that crosses a river.

However, suppose further that a so-called history of recent topics ofinterest (rTOI's) of the given user exists and this recorded and machinesystem readable history indicates the user has been recently using aSTAN_(—)2 topic node directed to the question of what lowest rate cansomeone like himself obtain for a bridge loan. In that case, theSTAN_(—)2 system can further automatically deduce that the more specifictopic of interest (TOI) on the given user's mind probably is: “What isthe lowest rate that I can negotiate for myself right now and here whentrying to obtain a bridge loan from this banking company, and perhapseven from this particular loan officer?” Accordingly, and in response tothe given user having submitted just the single keyword, “bridge”, theSTAN_(—)2 system can automatically present to the user an informationaloffering (also referred to herein as a “content source recommendation”)that basically says, “Press here to obtain more informational contentand/or to obtain online connection to other STAN_(—)2 users who arecurrently interested in the question of “What is the lowest rate that Ican negotiate for myself right now and here when trying to obtain abridge loan from this banking company?”

But that is not all. Suppose that the STAN_(—)2 instant offering toconnect the user with on-topic content sources (e.g., instant chatopportunities corresponding to the specific exemplary topic of “What isthe lowest . . . bridge loan from this banking company?”) include notonly instant chat opportunities (and/or other Notes Exchange sessions)that are being supported by STAN_(—)2 system resources (e.g., STAN_(—)2server computers or STAN_(—)2 cloud computing data centers) but alsoNotes Exchange sessions that are being supported by external platformsand are nonetheless on-topic. How can that be done? It will be disclosedherein how the STAN_(—)2 system can operate to automatically andpersistently enrich its so-called topic nodes or topic centers (TC's)with additional, on-topic and cross-pollinating, and substantiallycontemporaneous data obtained from out-of-STAN resources.

Given the above example (the “bridge loan” example) and in furthersummary thereof, in one embodiment, the here-disclosed machine systemautomatically seeks to determine where and when the user is disposed interms for example of one or more of physical location, proximity toother persons or things, in terms of time zone, calendar date andpre-scheduled events—which calendar date could be a holiday or ascheduled vacation day (and optionally in terms of other metrics such aswhat velocity, acceleration, owned real estate spaces) and in terms oftopics of interest (TOI's) recently declared by the user (implicitly orexplicitly) to be recent topics of interest (rTOI's) of that user. TheSTAN_(—)2 system may further seek to determine what sounds, smells,additional content, or other attributes currently surround the user(physically and/or virtually) so as to better be able to determine theuser's current topic of interest. Is the user at home, at work, drivinga car, visiting a bank or at the eye glass store (for example)? Thiswork of determining most probable current topic of interests (cTOI) ispreferably performed in the background by machine-implemented automatedprocesses so that the user is not distracted by having to answerinfrastructural questions and instead the machine system gives theappearance to the user of being able to intuitively read the user's mindand understand from one or a few keywords (e.g., “bridge”) or other suchencodings what the user is thinking about; and better yet to guide thatuser to, or recommend to the user, content sources (includingrecommended instant chat rooms to connect to or recommended people tocontact for example) that are, with a high degree of probability,on-topic with and highly relevant to what the user is currently thinkingabout.

The above is to be contrasted with machine systems that force the userto consciously and explicitly define his or her current topic ofinterest (cTOI) at the infrastructural level (e.g., by explicitlymodifying the search strategy). When the mind is forced to jump to aninfrastructural level of detail, it can often lose track of thehigher-level, substantive material it was concentrating on. Morespecifically, suppose the user is thinking about Wheatstone bridges(these are a type of sensitive electronic measuring circuits) but thesearch engine the user is employing comes back annoyingly and asks: “Didyou mean Whitestone Bridge?” (where the latter is a popular rivercrossing in New York City). Needless to say, the user is nowdistractingly thrown off his/her main track of thought and has toannoyingly deal with the infrastructural mechanics of getting theautomated search tool to navigate away from its incorrect guess andtowards the correct current topic of interest (cTOI). The betterapproach would be to have an automated machine system which seems tointuitively know that when “this” user (who for example is currentlylogged in as “Stanley the Engineer”) uses the word “bridge” in hiscurrent location (e.g., the office at the electronics design company)and at this time (e.g., normal business hours) he probably means,“bridge” as in the topic of Wheatstone type bridge circuits and not someother topic that might have “bridge” as one of its keywords (or tags, ormeta-tags, etc.). Various means by way of which an automated machinesystem can be made to appear to have such intuition are describedherein.

In accordance with another aspect of the present disclosure, varioususer interface techniques are provided for allowing a user toconveniently interface with resources of the STAN_(—)2 system.

Other aspects of the disclosure will become apparent from the belowdetailed description.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The below detailed description section makes reference to theaccompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1A is a block diagram of an electromagnetically linked (e.g.,electronically and/or optically linked) networking environment thatincludes a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN_(—)2) sub-system inaccordance with the present disclosure and includes other networksub-systems whose resources may be used for cross-pollination and forthereby improving benefits obtained by users of the one or more of thesub-networks due to cross-pollination actions provided by the STAN_(—)2sub-system;

FIG. 1B is a combination of a first process flow chart, of sample pop-upwindows which may be displayed to a user of the STAN_(—)2 sub-networksystem of FIG. 1A and of an aliases cross-referencing data structuregenerated by the flow charted process;

FIG. 2 is a perspective view type of mapping diagram showing howtopic-to-topic associations (T2T), user-to-topic associations (U2T),user-to-user associations (U2U) and/or topic-to-content associations(T2C) may be enhanced by actions for example of Cross-PollinatingAutomated Persona bots (CPAP's) which are automatically generated by theSTAN_(—)2 sub-network system of FIG. 1A and sent out into the field tobring back proposed on-topic-content;

FIG. 3A is a diagram showing a drag-and-drop operation and also showingone possible on-screen presentation whereby a live user is invited toenlist as a cross-pollinating un-artificial persona (CPUP) at times whenthis CPUP will be using an external SN system while his focus is notbeing tracked in real time by the STAN_(—)2 sub-network system;

FIG. 3B is a diagram showing a first on-screen presentation whereinSTAN_(—)2 monitoring (e.g., CFi uploading) is turned off and an enlistedcross-pollinating un-artificial persona (CPUP) is nonetheless surveyedabout attributes of potential cross-pollinating material which mightwarrant being linked into;

FIG. 3C is a diagram showing a second on-screen presentation whereinSTAN_(—)2 monitoring is turned off and the enlisted CPUP of FIG. 3B isfurther surveyed about attributes of the potential cross-pollinatingmaterial;

FIG. 3D is a diagram showing a third on-screen presentation whereinSTAN_(—)2 monitoring is turned off and the enlisted CPUP of FIG. 3B isfurther surveyed about attributes of the potential cross-pollinatingmaterial;

FIG. 4A is a combination flow chart and data structure showing diagramillustrating how incoming cross-pollination material may be processed inaccordance with one embodiment;

FIG. 4B is a combination flow chart and data structure showing diagramillustrating how the mission guiding data structure of a to be launchedCPAP is formulated; and

FIGS. 4C-4D are a combination flow chart and data structure showingdiagram illustrating how an initially formed (instantiated) missionguiding template can be augmented with alternate language and/oralternate disciplinary area encodings and pointers to alternate areas ofsearch.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

FIG. 1A is a block diagram of an electromagnetically inter-linked (e.g.,electronically and/or optically linked) networking environment 100 thatincludes a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN_(—)2) sub-system 110in accordance with the present disclosure and which environment 100includes other sub-network systems (e.g., Non-STAN subnet 120) and whoseresources may be used to enhance online experiences of real person users(e.g., 131, 132) of the one or more of the sub-networks 110, 120, etc.due to cross-pollination actions instigated by the STAN_(—)2 sub-networksystem 110.

Background descriptions on how a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking(STAN) sub-system may operate can be found in the above-cited and hereincorporated U.S. application Ser. No. 12/369,274 filed Feb. 11, 2009 byJeffrey A. Rapaport et al. and originally entitled, “Social NetworkDriven Indexing System for Instantly Clustering People with ConcurrentFocus on Same Topic into On Topic Chat Rooms and/or for GeneratingOn-topic Search Results Tailored to User Preferences Regarding Topic”.As such, a detailed repetition of said incorporated by referencematerial will not be provided here. For sake of avoiding confusionbetween the drawings of Ser. No. 12/369,274 and the figures of thepresent application, drawings of Ser. No. 12/369,274 will be identifiedby the prefix, “giF.” (which is Fig. written backwards) while figures ofthe present application will be identified by the normal figure prefix,“Fig.”.

In brief, giF. 1A of the here incorporated '274 application shows howtopics of current interest to (not to be confused with content beingcurrently ‘focused upon’ by) individual online participants may beautomatically determined based on detection of certain content beingcurrently and emotively ‘focused upon’ by the respective onlineparticipants and based upon pre-developed profiles of the respectiveusers (e.g., registered and logged-in users of the STAN_(—)1 system).(Incidentally, in the here disclosed STAN_(—)2 system, the notion isincluded of determining what a user is not, or is less focusing upon aswell as what the user is most focusing upon for automaticallydetermining most probable topic(s) of current interest. For example, ifa user's personal profile records (e.g., DsCCp's) indicate that focusupon Topic ‘A’ usually occurs when the user is focusing on both URL1 andkeyword2, but it is clear that in the instance the user is not focusingon URL1, then the STAN_(—)2 system can for some users automaticallydetermine that the user's thought patterns are probably not focusingupon Topic ‘A’ but rather on some alternate topic that is also heavilylinked to the same keyword2.)

Further in brief, giF. 1B of the incorporated '274 application shows adata structure of a first stored chat co-compatibility profile that canchange with changes of user persona (e.g., change of mood); giF. 1Cshows a data structure of a stored topic co-compatibility profile thatcan also change with change of user persona (e.g., change of mood,change of surroundings); and giF. 1E shows a data structure of a storedpersonal emotive expression profile of a given user, wherebybiometrically detected facial or other biotic expressions of theprofiled user may be used to deduce emotional involvement with on-screencontent and thus degree of emotional involvement with focused uponcontent. One embodiment of the STAN_(—)1 system disclosed in the hereincorporated '274 application uses uploaded CFi (current focusindicator) packets to automatically determine what topic or topics aremost likely ones that each user is currently thinking about based on thecontent that is being currently focused upon with above-thresholdintensity. The determined topic is logically linked by operations of theSTAN_(—)1 system to topic nodes (herein also referred to as topiccenters or TC's) within a hierarchical parent-child tree represented bydata stored in the STAN_(—)1 system.

Yet further and in brief, giF. 2A of the incorporated '274 applicationshows a data structure of a stored CFi record while giF. 2B shows a datastructure of an implied vote-indicating record (CVi) which may beautomatically extracted from biometric information obtained from theuser. The giF. 3B diagram shows an exemplary screen display whereinso-called chat opportunity invitations (herein referred to asin-STAN-vitations™) are provided to the user based on the STAN_(—)1system's understanding of what topics are currently of prime interest tothe user. The giF. 3C diagram shows how one embodiment of the STAN_(—)1system (of the '274 application) can automatically determine what topicor domain of topics might most likely be of current interest for a givenuser and then responsively can recommend, based on likelihood rankings,content (e.g., chat rooms) which are most likely to be on-topic for thatuser and compatible with the user's current status (e.g., level ofexpertise in the topic).

Moreover, in the here incorporated '274 application, giF. 4A shows astructure of a cloud computing system that may be used to implement aSTAN_(—)1 system on a geographic region by geographic region basis.Importantly, each data center of giF. 4A has an automated Domains/TopicsLookup Service (DLUX) executing therein which receives up- or in-loadedCFi data packets (Current Focus identifying records) from users andcombines these with user histories uploaded form the user's localmachine and/or user histories already stored in the cloud toautomatically determine probable topics of current interest then on theuser's mind. In one embodiment the DLUX points to so-called topic nodesof a hierarchical topics tree. An exemplary data structure for such atopics tree is provided in giF. 4B which shows details of a stored andadaptively updated topic mapping data structure used by one embodimentof the STAN_(—)1 system. Also each data center of giF. 4A further hasone or more automated Domain-specific Matching Services (DsMS's)executing therein which are selected by the DLUX to further process theup- or in-loaded CFi data packets and match alike users to one anotheror to matching chat rooms and then presents the latter as scored chatopportunities. Also each data center of giF. 4A further has one or moreautomated Chat Rooms management Services (CRS) executing therein formanaging chat rooms or the like operating under auspices of theSTAN_(—)1 system. Also each data center of giF. 4A further has anautomated Trending Data Store service that keeps track of progression ofrespective users over time in different topic sectors and makes trendprojections based thereon.

The here incorporated '274 application is extensive and has many otherdrawings as well as descriptions that will not all be briefed upon herebut are nonetheless incorporated herein by reference.

Referring now to FIG. 1A of the present disclosure, in the illustratedenvironment 100 which includes a more advanced STAN_(—)2 system 110, afirst real and living user 131 (also USER-A, also “Stan”) is shown tohave access to a first data processing device 131 a (also CPU-1). Thefirst user 131 may routinely log into and utilize the illustratedSTAN_(—)2 Social-Topical Adaptive Networking system 110 by causing CPU-1to send a corresponding user identification package 131 u 1 (e.g., username and user password data signals) to a log-in interface portion 118of the STAN_(—)2 system 110. In response to validation of such log-in,the STAN_(—)2 system 110 automatically fetches various profiles of thelogged-in user (131, “Stan”) from a database (DB, 119) thereof forpurpose of determining the user's currently probable topics of primeinterest, moods, chat co-compatibilities and so forth. In oneembodiment, a same user (e.g., 131) may have plural personal log-inpages, for example, one that allows him to log in as “Stan” and anotherwhich allows that same user to log-in under the alter ego identity ofsay, “Stewart” if that user is in the mood to assume the “Stewart”persona at the moment rather than the “Stan” persona. If a user (e.g.,131) logs-in via interface 118 with a second alter ego identity (e.g.,“Stewart”) rather than with a first alter ego identity (e.g., “Stan”),the STAN_(—)2 Social-Topical Adaptive Networking system 110automatically activates personal profile records (e.g., CpCCp's,DsCCp's, PEEP's) of the second alter ego identity (e.g., “Stewart”)rather than those of the first alter ego identity (e.g., “Stan”). Topicsof current interest to the logged-in persona may be identified as beinglogically associated with specific nodes (herein also referred to asTC's or topic centers) on a topics domain-parent/child tree structuresuch as the one schematically indicated at 115 within the drawn symbolthat represents the STAN_(—)2 system 110 in FIG. 1A. A correspondingstored data structure that represents the tree structure in the earlierSTAN_(—)1 system (not shown) is illustratively represented by drawingnumber giF. 4B. The topics defining tree 115 as well as user profiles ofregistered STAN_(—)2 users may be stored in various parts of theSTAN_(—)2 maintained database (DB) 119 and/or in the user's local and/orremotely-instantiated data processing equipment (e.g., CPU-1, CPU-2,etc.). The database (DB) 119 may be a centralized one or one that issemi-redundantly distributed over different service centers of ageographically distributed cloud computing system. In the distributedcloud computing environment, if one service center becomesnonoperational or overwhelmed with service requests, another somewhatredundant service center can function as a backup (yet more details areprovided in the here incorporate STAN_(—)1 patent application).

As used herein, the term, “local data processing equipment” includesdata processing equipment that is remote from the user but isnonetheless controllable by a local means available to the user. Morespecifically, the user (e.g., 131) may have a so-called net-computer(e.g., 131 a) in his local possession where that net-computer isoperatively coupled to a virtual computer or desktop instantiated in oneor more servers on a connected to network (e.g., the Internet 101) andthrough operations of the relatively minimally equipped net-computerthat cooperate with greater computing resources (hardware and/orsoftware) available in the instantiating server(s), the user is made tofeel as if he a has a much more resourceful computer locally in hispossession (more resourceful in terms of hardware and/or software, bothof which are physical manifestations as those terms are used herein)even though that might not be true. For example, the user's locallypossessed net-computer (e.g., 131 a) may not have a hard disk or a keypad but rather only a touch-sensitive display screen. However the server(or cloud) instantiated virtual machine that services that net-computercan project itself as having an extremely large hard disk and aversatile keyboard that appears with context variable keys on the user'stouch-responsive display screen. Occasionally the term “downloading”will be used herein under the assumption that the user's personallycontrolled computer (e.g., 131) is receiving the downloaded content.However, in the case of a net-book or the like, downloaded is to beunderstood as including the more general notion of inloaded, wherein avirtual computer on the network (or in a cloud computing system) isinloaded with the content rather than having that content being“downloaded” from the network to an actual local and complete computer.Of course, certain resources such as the illustrated GPS-2 peripheral ofCPU-2 may not always be capable of being operatively mimicked with anin-net or in-cloud virtual counterpart; in which case it is understoodthat the GPS resource is local. (On the other hand, cell phonetriangulation technology and/or other technologies may be used to mimicthe effect of having a GPS unit although one might not be present.)

It is to be understood that the CPU-1 device (131 a) used by first user131 when interacting with (e.g., being tracked in real time by) theSTAN_(—)2 system 110 is not limited to a desktop computer having forexample a “central” processing unit (CPU), but rather that manyvarieties of data processing devices having appropriate minimalintelligence capability are contemplated as being usable, includinglaptop computers, palmtop PDA's, tablet computers, net-computers, 3rdgeneration or higher smart-phones (e.g., an iPhone™, and Android™ phone)and so on. The CPU-1 device (131 a) used by first user 131 may have anynumber of different user interface (UI) and environment detectingdevices included therein such as, but not limited to, one or moreintegrally incorporated webcams (one of which may be robotically aimedto focus on what off screen view the user appears to be looking at), oneor more integrally incorporated audio (e.g., Bluetooth™) interfacingdevices, an integrally incorporated GPS (Global Positioning System)location identifier and/or other automatic location identifying means,an integrally incorporated accelerometer and/or other such MEMs devices(micro-electromechanical devices), various biometric sensors (e.g.,pulse, respiration rate, eye blink rate, eye focus angle) that areoperatively coupleable to the user 131 and so on. As those skilled inthe art will appreciate from the here incorporated STAN_(—)1 disclosure,automated location determining devices such as integrally incorporatedGPS and/or audio pickups may be used to determine user surroundings(e.g., at work versus at home, alone or in noisy party) and to thusinfer from this sensing of environment, the current user persona (e.g.,mood, frame of mind, etc.). One or more (e.g., stereoscopic) firstsensors may be provided in one embodiment for automatically determiningwhat off-screen or on-screen object(s) the user is currently looking at;and if off-screen, a robotically amiable further sensor (e.g., a webcam)may be automatically trained on the off-screen view in order to identifyand categorize it. In one embodiment, an automated image categorizingtool such as GoogleGoggles™ may be used to automatically categorizeimagery that the user appears to be focusing upon. The categorizationdata of the automatically categorized image may then be used as anadditional “encoding” for assisting the STAN_(—)2 system 110 indetermining what topic or finite set of topics the user (e.g., 131)currently most probably has in mind. It is within the contemplation ofthe present disclosure that alternatively or in addition to having animaging device near the user and using an automated image categorizingtool such as GoogleGoggles™, other encoding detecting devices andautomated categorizing tools may be deployed such as, but not limitedto, sound detecting, analyzing and categorizing tools; ambient chemistryand temperature detecting, analyzing and categorizing tools (e.g., Whathuman olfactorable and/or unsmellable vapors, gases are in the airsurrounding the user and at what changing concentration levels?);velocity and/or acceleration detecting, analyzing and categorizing tools(e.g., Is the user in a moving vehicle and if so, heading in whatdirection?); and virtually-surrounding or physically-surrounding otherpeople detecting, analyzing and categorizing tools (e.g., Is the user invirtual and/or physical contact with other personas, and if so what aretheir current attributes?).

Each user (e.g., 131, 132) may project a respective one of differentpersonas (e.g., an “inside” versus “outside” persona) based on thespecific environment (including presence of other people virtually orphysically) that the user finds him or herself in. For example, theremay be an at-the-office or work-site persona that is different from anat-home or an on-vacation persona. More specifically, one of the manypersonas that the first user 131 may have is one that predominates in aspecific environment 131 e 2 (e.g., as geographically detected byintegral GPS-2 device of CPU-2). When user 131 is in this environmentalcontext (131 e 2), that first user 131 may choose to identify him orherself with (or have his CPU device automatically choose for him/her) adifferent user identification (UAID-2, also 131 u 2) than the oneutilized (UAID-1, also 131 u 1) when typically interacting in real timewith the STAN_(—)2 system 110. A variety of automated tools may be usedto detect, analyze and categorize user environment (e.g., place, time,calendar date, velocity, acceleration, surroundings—objects and/orpeople, etc.). These may include but are not limited to, webcams, GPS,electronic time keeper, MEMs, chemical sniffers, etc.

When operating under this alternate persona (131 u 2), the first user131 may choose (or pre-elect) to not be monitored in real time by (andthrough the CFi, CVi mechanisms) or to otherwise be generallyinteracting with the STAN_(—)2 system 110. Instead, the user 131 mayelect to log into a different kind of social networking (SN) system 120or other content providing system (e.g., 148, 160) and to fly,so-to-speak, solo inside that external platform 120. While sointeracting with the alternate SN system 120 (e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™,LinkedIn™, YouTube™, GoogleWave™, ClearSpring™, etc.), the user maydevelop user-to-user associations (U2U, see block 111) that aredifferent than those developed under real time tracking auspices of theSTAN_(—)2 system 110. Moreover, the user 131 may, while interacting onlywith the alternate SN system 120 (and possibly under an alternate IDand/or persona 131 u 2—i.e. “Stewart” instead of “Stan”), developuser-to-topic associations (U2T, see block 112) that are different thanthose developed under auspices of the STAN_(—)2 system 110. Also,topic-to-topic associations (T2T, see block 113) that are operativewithin the context of the alternate SN system 120 may be different fromthose that at the same time have developed inside the STAN_(—)2 system110. Additionally, topic-to-content associations (T2C, see block 114)that are operative within the context of the alternate SN system 120 maybe different from those that at the same time have developed inside theSTAN_(—)2 system 110.

Before providing a more concrete example of how a given user (e.g.,Stan/Stew 131) may have multiple personas and may interact differentlywhen influenced by contexts of different social networking (SN) or otherplatforms, a brief discussion about those possible other SN's or otherplatforms is provided here. There are many well known dot.COM websites(140) that provide various kinds of social interaction services. One ofthe currently most well known and used ones is the FaceBook™, system 141(hereafter also referred to as FB). FB users establish an FB account andset up various permission options that are either “behind the wall” andthus relatively private or are “on the wall” and thus viewable by anymember of the public. Only pre-identified “friends” (e.g.,friend-for-the-day, friend-for-the-hour) can look at material “behindthe wall”. FB users can manually “de-friend” and “re-friend” peopledepending on who they want to let in on a given day or other time periodto the more private material behind their wall.

Another well known SN site is MySpace™ (142) and it is somewhat similarto FB. A third SN platform that is gaining popularity amongst so-called“professionals” is the LinkedIn™ platform (144). LinkedIn™ users post apublic “Profile” of themselves which typically appears like a resume andpublicizes their professional credentials in various areas ofprofessional activity. LinkedIn™ users can form networks of linked-toother professionals. The system automatically keeps track of who islinked to whom and how many degrees of linking separation, if any, arebetween people who appear to the LinkedIn™ system to be strangers toeach other because they are not directly linked to one another.LinkedIn™ users can create Discussion Groups and then invite variouspeople to join those Discussion Groups. Online discussions within thosecreated Discussion Groups can be monitored (censored) or not monitoredby the creator (owner) of the Discussion Group. For many DiscussionGroups, an individual has to be pre-accepted into the Group (forexample, accepted by the Group moderator) before the individual can seewhat is being discussed behind the wall of the members-only DiscussionGroup. Accordingly, as is the case with “behind the wall” conversationsin FaceBook™, Group Discussions within LinkedIn™ may not be viewable torelative “strangers” who have not been accepted as a linked-in friend orcontact for whom an earlier member of the LinkedIn™ system sort ofvouches for by “accepting” them into their inner ring of direct (1stdegree of operatively connection) contacts.

The Twitter™ system (145) is somewhat different because any member ofthe public can “follow” the “tweets” output by so-called “tweeters”. A“tweet” is conventionally limited to only 140 characters. Twitter™followers can sign up to automatically receive indications that theirfavorite “tweeters” have tweeted something new and then they can look atthe output “tweet” without need for any special permissions. Typically,celebrities such as movie stars output many tweets per day and they havegroups of fans who regularly follow their tweets. It could be said thatthe fans of these celebrities consider their followed “tweeters” to beinfluential persons and thus the fans hang onto every tweeted outputsent by their worshipped celebrity (e.g., movie star).

The Google™ Corporation (Mountain View, Calif.) provides a number ofwell known services including their famous online and free to use searchengine. They also provide other services such a Google™ controlledGmail™ service (146) which is roughly similar to many other online emailservices like those of Yahoo™, EarthLink™, AOL™, Microsoft Outlook™Email, and so on. The Gmail™ service (146) has a Group Chat functionwhich allows registered members to form chat groups and chat with oneanother. GoogleWave™ (147) is a project collaboration system that isstill maturing at the time of this writing. Incidentally, MicrosoftOutlook™ in whole also provides calendaring and collaboration schedulingservices whereby a user can propose, declare or accept proposed meetingor other events to be placed on the user's computerized schedule. It iswithin the contemplation of the present disclosure for the STAN_(—)2system to periodically import calendaring and/or collaboration/eventscheduling data from the user's Microsoft Outlook™ and/or other alikescheduling databases (irrespective of whether those scheduling databasesand/or their support software are physically local within a user'scomputer or they are provided via a computing cloud; and if importationis permitted by the user) so that the STAN_(—)2 system can use suchimported scheduling data to infer at the scheduled dates, the user'smore likely environment. Incidentally, it is within the contemplation ofthe present disclosure that essentially any database and/or automatedservice that is hosted in and/or by one or more of a user's physicallylocal data processing device, a website's web serving and/or mirroringservers and parts or all of a cloud computing system or equivalent canbe ported in whole or in part so as to be hosted in and/or by differentone of such physical mechanisms. With net-computers, palm-heldconvergence devices (e.g., iPhone™, iPad™ etc.) and the like, it isusually not of significance where specifically the physical processes ofdata processing take place but rather that timely communication andconnectivity are provided so that the user experiences substantiallysame results. Of course, some acts of data acquisition and/or processingmay by necessity have to take place at the physical locale of the usersuch as the acquisition of user responses (e.g., touches on atouch-sensitive tablet screen) and of local user encodings (e.g., whatthe user's local environment looks, sounds and/or smells like).Returning back to the digressed-away from method of automaticallyimporting scheduling data to thereby infer at the scheduled dates, theuser's more likely environment, a more specific example can be this: Ifthe user's scheduling database indicates that next Friday he isscheduled to be at the Social Networking Developers Conference (ahypothetical example) and more particularly at events 3, 5 and 7 in thatconference at the respective hours of 3:00 PM, 5:00 PM and 7:00 PM, thenwhen that date and corresponding time segment comes around, theSTAN_(—)2 system may use such information as one of its gatheredencodings for then automatically determining the user's likely mood,surroundings and so forth. On the other hand, if the user's schedulingdatabase indicates that next Friday he is planning to take off from workand go to a named vacation resort, the STAN_(—)2 system may use thatalternate imported information for automatically determining the user'slikely mood, surroundings and so forth at the corresponding dates andtimes.

Additionally, the Microsoft Outlook™ product also provides a Taskstracking function wherein various to-do items and their criticalities(e.g., flagged as a must-do today, must-do next week, etc.). It iswithin the contemplation of the present disclosure for the STAN_(—)2system to periodically import Task tracking data from the user'sMicrosoft Outlook™ and/or other alike task tracking databases (ifpermitted by the user) so that the STAN_(—)2 system can use suchimported task tracking data to infer during the scheduled time periods,the user's more likely environment and moods. More specifically, if theuser's task tracking database indicates that the user has a highpriority, high pressure work task to be completed by end of day, theSTAN_(—)2 system may use this imported information to deduce that theuser's mind is most likely focused on topics related to the must-be-donetask(s) as their deadlines approach and they are listed as not yetcomplete. Similarly, the user may have Customer Relations Management(CRM) software that the user regularly employs and the database of suchCRM software might provide exportable information (if permitted by theuser) about specific persons, projects, etc. that the user will morelikely be involved with during certain time periods and/or when presentin certain locations. It is within the contemplation of the presentdisclosure for the STAN_(—)2 system to periodically import CRM trackingdata from the user's CRM tracking database(s) (if permitted by the user)so that the STAN_(—)2 system can use such imported CRM tracking data toinfer the user's more likely environment and moods based on detectedtime and place and/or then-in-contact other persons.

The StumbleUpon™ system (148) allows registered users to recommendwebsites to one another. Users can click a thumb-up icon to vote for awebsite they like and can click on a thumb-down icon to indicate theydon't like it. The voted upon websites can be categorized by use of“Tags” which generally are one or two short words to give a rough ideaof what the website is about.

Another well known social networking (SN) system is the so-calledSecondLife™ network (160). The SecondLife™ network presents itself toits users as an alternate, virtual landscape in which the users appearas “avatars” (e.g., animated 3D cartoon characters) and they interactwith each other as such. The Second Life™ system allows for Non-PlayerCharacters (NPC's) to appear within the SecondLife™ landscape. These areavatars that are not controlled by a real life person but are rathercomputer controlled automated characters. The avatars of real personscan have interactions within the SecondLife™ landscape with the avatarsof the NPC's.

Aside from these various kinds of social networking (SN) platforms(e.g., 141-148, 160), other social interactions may take place throughemail exchanges, list-serve exchanges, comments posted on “blogs”.Various organizations (dot.org's, 150) and content publicationinstitutions (155) may publish content directed to specific topics(e.g., to outdoor nature activities such as those followed by theField-and-Streams™ magazine) and that content may be freely available toall members of the public or only to subscribers in accordance withsubscription policies generated by the various content providers.

A user (e.g., 131) of the STAN_(—)2 system 110 may also be a user of oneor more of these various other social networking (SN) and/or othercontent providing platforms (120, 140, 150, 155, 160, etc.) and at timesthe user (e.g., 131) may choose to be disconnected from (e.g., notlogged-into and/or not monitored by) the STAN_(—)2 system 110 whileinstead interacting with one or more of these various social networking(SN) and other content providing platforms (120, 140, 150, 155, 160,etc.). So now a hypothetical example will be studied where User-A (131)is going to be interacting with an out-of-STAN_(—)2 subnet 120 (wherethe latter could be any one of outside platforms like 141, 142, 144etc.).

In this hypothetical example, the same first user 131 (USER-A) employsthe username, “Stanley” (or “Stan” for short) when logged into and beingtracked in real time by the STAN_(—)2 system 110 (and may use acorresponding Stanley-associated password) while on the other hand, thesame first user 131 employs the username, “Stewart” (or “Stew” forshort) when logging into the alternate SN system 120 (e.g., FaceBook™,MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.) and he then may use a correspondingStewart-associated password. The Stewart persona (131 u 2) may favorfocusing upon topics related to music and classical literature whereasthe Stanley persona (131 u 1) may favor focusing on topics related toscience and politics (this being merely a hypothesized example).Accordingly, the Stewart persona (131 u 2) may more frequently join andparticipate in music/classical literature discussion groups when loggedinto the alternate SN system 120. By contrast, the Stanley persona (131u 1) may more frequently join and participate in science/politics topicgroups when logged into or otherwise being tracked by the STAN_(—)2system 110. The local interface devices (e.g., CPU-1, CPU-2) used by theStanley persona (131 u 1) and the Stewart persona (131 u 2) may be asame device (e.g., same laptop computer) or different ones or a mixtureof both depending on hardware availability and mood of the user. Theenvironments (e.g., work, home, coffee house) used by the Stanleypersona (131 u 1) and the Stewart persona (131 u 2) may also be same ordifferent ones depending on a variety of circumstances.

Despite the possibilities for such difference of persona and interests,there may be instances where user-to-user associations (U2U) and/oruser-to-topic associations (U2T) developed by the Stewart persona (131 u2) while operating exclusively under the auspices of the SN system 120environment and outside the tracking radar of the STAN_(—)2 system 110may be of cross-pollination value to the Stanley persona (131 u1)—and/or to other users (e.g., 132 u 1) of the STAN_(—)2 system 110.

More specifically, a cross-discipline discussion may erupt within agiven Discussion Group (e.g., node 129 x) of the external SN system 120(e.g., LinkedIn™) that involves both politics and classical literature.(Recall that the ‘Stewart’ persona likes literature while the ‘Stanley’persona of user 131 likes politics.) In such a case, it may bebeneficial to join together (by invitation) some of the out-of-STAN2participants in the given external Discussion Group (e.g., 129 x) withsome in-STAN2 participants who are currently interacting under aco-related topic node (115 x, understood to be a node of thein-STAN_(—)2 topics tree 115) and are equally enthusiastically involvedin the same point of interest that encompasses a cross-disciplinecrossover between politics and classical literature.

But how is such a joinder of out-of-STAN2 participants (coupled to node129 x) and in-STAN2 participants (coupled to node 115 x) to take place?It should be recalled that the first user 131 is operating under hisStewart persona (131 u 2) when participating enthusiastically in thishypothetical example with the out-of-STAN2 Discussion Group (e.g., 129x) of the external SN system 120. In the heat of discussion at node 129x, it may never occur to user 131 (in his Stewart persona) to think ofalerting an in-STAN2 participant of node 115 x to come take a look atwhat is happening at the moment inside discussion node 129 x. Moreover,a random in-STAN2 participant of node 115 x might not be a member of theout-of-STAN2 platform 120 and thus cannot quickly and easily pop in totake a look. (That other user may first have to register and get“accepted” as a friend, buddy etc. where all this takes time.)

Suppose that at a later time, long after the heated discussion aboutpolitics and classical literature erupted at outside node 129 x, thefirst user 131 finally logs-in (via interface 118) into the STAN_(—)2system 110. By that time, this first user 131 may have already forgottenwhat transpired inside discussion node 129 x of external SN system 120.Moreover, that first user 131 may not at this time navigate his topicfocus to coincide with the topic covered by in-STAN2 node 115 x. So theparticipants of the out-of-STAN2 Discussion Group (e.g., 129 x) do notget an opportunity to link together with the participants of thein-STAN2 node 115 x even though such cross-platform linkage mightbeneficially enhance the Internet using experiences of all involved. Ifthis kind of failure-to-link was happening under auspices of the older,STAN_(—)1 system (not shown), the STAN_(—)1 system might have no way ofknowing that it should “invite” the Stanley persona (131 u 1) of user131 to take another look internal node 115 x and also at externaldiscussion 129 x even if the STAN_(—)1 system (not shown) were cognizantof the existence of that external discussion node 129 x.

However, the STAN_(—)2 system 110 (FIG. 1A) is different as compared tothe older STAN_(—)1 system (not shown).

Firstly, the STAN_(—)2 system 110 actively tries to develop and storeso-called External SN Profile records 131 p 2, 132 p 2 for each of itsregistered members (e.g., 131, 132 respectively). The External SNProfile records (e.g., 131 p 2, 132 p 2) may reflect user compatibilitycharacteristics (e.g., co-compatibilities to other users,compatibilities to specific topics) of one or more external personas(e.g., 131 u 2, 132 u 2) of registered members of the STAN_(—)2 system110 who agree to have their out-of-STAN_(—)2 characteristic indicatingrecords automatically scanned into (imported into) and periodicallyre-scanned by the STAN_(—)2 system 110. In one embodiment, theout-of-STAN_(—)2 characteristic indicating records may alternatively oradditionally be partly or wholly manually entered into records of theSTAN_(—)2 database (DB) 119 and optionally validated by entry checkingsoftware or other means and thereafter incorporated into the user'sExternal SN Profile records.

The external profile importing mechanism is more clearly illustrated forthe case of second user 132. In one embodiment, while this second user132 was logged-in into the STAN_(—)2 system 110 (e.g., under hisSTAN_(—)2 persona as “Tom”, 132 u 1), a somewhat intrusive and automatedfirst software agent (BOT, see process 170 of FIG. 1B) of system 110invited the second user 132 to reveal by way of a survey his UBID-2information (his user name, “Thomas” and optionally his correspondingpassword) which he uses to log into interface 128 of the Out-of-STANother system 120, and if applicable; to reveal the identity and grantaccess to the alternate data processing device (CPU-4) that user 132uses when logged into the Out-of STAN other system 120. The automatedsoftware agent (not explicitly shown in FIG. 1A) then recorded an aliasrecord into the STAN_(—)2 database (DB 119) where the stored record (see184 of FIG. 1B) logically associates the user's UAID-1 of the 110 domainwith his UAID-2 of the 120 domain. Yet another alias record would make asimilar association between the UAID-1 identification of the 110 domainwith some other identifications, if any, used by user 132 in yet otherexternal domains (e.g., 141, 142, 144, etc.) Then the agent beganscanning that alternate data processing device (CPU-4) for local friendsand/or buddies lists 132L2 stored in the local memory of CPU-4. Theautomated importation scan may also cover local email contact lists132L1 and Tweet following lists 132L3 held in that alternate dataprocessing device (CPU-4). If it is given the alternate site passwordfor temporary usage, the STAN_(—)2 automated agent also logged into theOut-of-STAN domain 120 while pretending to be “Thomas” (with user 132'spermission to do so) and began scanning that alternatecontacts/friends/followed tweets/etc. listing site for remote listings132R of Thomas's email contacts, Gmail™ contacts, buddy lists, friendlists, accepted contacts lists, followed tweet lists and so on dependingon predetermined knowledge held by the STAN_(—)2 system of how theexternal content site 120 is structured. Different external contentsites (e.g., 120, 141, 142, 144, etc.) may have different mechanisms forallowing logged-in users to access their private (behind the wall) andpublic friends, contacts and other such lists based on unique privacypolicies maintained by the various external content sites. In oneembodiment, database 119 of the STAN_(—)2 system 110 stores accessingknow-how data (e.g., knowledge base rules) for known ones of theexternal content sites. In one embodiment, a registered STAN_(—)2 user(e.g., 132′ of FIG. 2) is enlisted to serve as a sponsor into the Out-ofSTAN platform for automated agents output by the STAN_(—)2 system 110.In one embodiment, cooperation agreements are negotiated and signed asbetween operators of the STAN_(—)2 system 110 and operators of one ormore of the Out-of STAN other platforms (e.g., external platforms 120,141, 142, 144, etc.) that permit automated agents output by theSTAN_(—)2 system 110 or live agents coached by the STAN_(—)2 system toenter the other platforms and operate therein in accordance withrestrictions set forth in the cooperation agreements.

Referring now to FIG. 1B, shown is a machine-implemented and automatedprocess 170 by way of which user 132 might be coaxed into allowing theSTAN_(—)2 system 110 to import all or a filter-criteria determinedsubset of the second user's external lists, 132L, 132R into STAN_(—)2stored profile records 132 p 2 of that second user 132.

Process 170 is initiated step 171 (Begin). The initiation might be inautomated response to the STAN_(—)2 system determining that user 132 isnot heavily focusing upon any on-screen content of his CPU (e.g., 132 a)at this time and therefore this would likely be a good time to push anunsolicited usage survey or favor request on user 132.

The unsolicited usage survey push begins at step 172. Dashed logicalconnection 172 a points to a possible survey dialog box 182 that mightthen be displayed to user 132 as part of step 172. The illustratedcontent of dialog box 182 may provide one or more conventional controlbuttons such as a virtual pushbutton 182 b for allowing the user 132 toquickly respond to the pushed (e.g., popped up) survey proposal 182.Reference numbers like 182 b do not appear in the popped-up surveydialog box 182. Embracing hyphens like the ones around reference number182 b (e.g., “−182 b-”) indicate that it is a nondisplayed referencenumbers. A same use of embracing hyphens is used in other illustrationsherein of display content to indicate nondisplay thereof.

More specifically, introduction information 182 a of dialog box 182informs the user of what he is being asked to do. Pushbutton 182 ballows the user to respond affirmatively in a general way. However, ifthe STAN_(—)2 has detected that the user is currently using a particularcontent site (e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.) more heavilythan others, the popped-up dialog box 182 may provide a suggestive andmore specific answer option 182 e for the user whereby the user will nothave to push a sequence of numerous answer buttons to navigate to hisdesired conclusion. If the user does not want to be now bothered, he canclick on (or otherwise activate) the Not-Now button 182 c. In responseto this, the STAN_(—)2 system will understand that it guessed wrong onuser 132 being in an idle mode and thus ready to participate in such asurvey. The STAN_(—)2 system will adaptively alter its survey optionalgorithms for user 132 so as to better guess when in the future(through a series of trials and errors) it is better to bother user 132with such pushed (unsolicited) surveys. Pressing of the Not-Now button182 c does not mean user 132 never wants to be queried about suchinformation, just not now. The task is rescheduled for a later time.User 132 may alternatively press the Remind-me-via-email button 182 d.In the latter case, the STAN_(—)2 system will automatically send anemail to a pre-selected email account of user 132 inviting him to engagein the same survey (182, 183) at a time of his choosing. TheMore-Options button 182 g provides user 132 with more action optionsand/or more information. The other social networking (SN) button 182 fis similar to 182 e but guesses as to an alternate network account whichuser 132 might now want to share information about. In one embodiment,each of the more-specific affirmation (OK) buttons 182 e and 182 fincludes a user modifiable options section 182 s. More specifically,when a user affirms (OK) that he or she wants to let the STAN_(—)2system import data from the user's FaceBook™ account(s) or otherexternal platform account(s), the user may simultaneously wish to agreeto permit the STAN_(—)2 system to automatically export (in response toimport requests from those identified external accounts) some or all ofshareable data from the user's STAN_(—)2 account(s). In other words, itis conceivable that in the future, external platforms such as FaceBook™,MySpace™, LinkedIn™, GoogleWave™, GoogleBuzz™, Google Social Search™,FriendFeed™, blogs, ClearSpring™, YahooPulse™, Friendster™, Bebo™, etc.might evolve so as to automatically seek cross-pollination data from theSTAN_(—)2 system and by future agreements such is made legally possible.In that case, the STAN_(—)2 user might wish to leave the illustrateddefault of “2-way Sharing is OK” as is. Alternatively, the user mayactivate the options scroll down sub-button within area 182 s of OKvirtual button 182 e and pick another option (e.g., “2-way Sharing NOTOK”—option not shown).

If in step 172 the user agreed to now being questioned, then step 173 isnext executed. Otherwise, process 170 is exited in accordance with anexit option chosen by the user in step 172. As seen in the nextpopped-up and corresponding dialog box 183, the user is again given someintroductory information 183 a about what is happening in this proposeddialog box 183. Data entry box 183 b asks the user for his user-name asused in the identified outside account. A default answer may bedisplayed such as the user-name (e.g., “Tom”) that user 132 uses whenlogging into the STAN_(—)2 system. Data entry box 183 c asks the userfor his user-password as used in the identified outside account. Thedefault answer may indicate that filling in this information isoptional. In one embodiment, one or both of entry boxes 183 b, 183 c maybe automatically pre-filled by identification data automaticallyobtained from the encodings acquisition mechanism of the user's localdata processing device. For example a built-in webcam automaticallyrecognizes his/her face, a built-in audio pick-up automaticallyrecognizes his/her voice and/or a built-in wireless key detectorautomatically recognizes presence of the user possessed key devicewhereby manual entry of the user name and/or password is not necessaryand step 173 can be performed automatically without the user'sawareness. Pressing button 183 e provides the user with additionalinformation and/or optional actions. Pressing button 183 d returns theuser to the previous dialog box (182). In one embodiment, if the userprovides the STAN_(—)2 system with his password (183 c), an additionalpop-up window asks the user to give STAN_(—)2 some time (e.g., 24 hours)before changing his password and then advises him to change his passwordthereafter for his protection.

Although interfacing between the user and the STAN_(—)2 system is shownillustratively as a series of dialog boxes like 182 and 183 it is withinthe contemplation of this disclosure that various other kinds of controlinterfacing may be used to query the user and that the selected controlinterfacing may depend on user context at the time. For example, if theuser (e.g., 132) is currently focusing upon a SecondLife™ environment inwhich he is represented by an animated avatar, it may be moreappropriate for the STAN_(—)2 system to present itself as asurvey-taking avatar (e.g., a uniformed NPC with a clipboard) whoapproaches the user's avatar and presents these inquiries in accordancewith that motif. On the other hand, if the user (e.g., 132) is currentlyinterfacing with his CPU (e.g., 132 a) by using a mostly audio interface(e.g., a BlueTooth™ microphone and earpiece), it may be more appropriatefor the STAN_(—)2 system to present itself as a survey-taking voiceentity that presents its inquiries (if possible) in accordance with thatpredominantly audio motif, and so on.

If in step 173 the user provided one or more of the requested items ofinformation (e.g., 183 b, 183 c), then in subsequent step 174 theobtained information is automatically stored into an aliases trackingportion (e.g., record(s)) of the system database (DB 119). An exemplaryDB record structure is shown at 184. For each entered data column, thetop row identifies the associated SN or other content providing platform(e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.). The second row providesthe username or other alias used by the queried user (e.g., 132) whenlogged into that platform (or presenting himself otherwise on thatplatform). The third row provides the user password and/or othersecurity key used by the queried user (e.g., 132) when logging into thatplatform (or presenting himself otherwise for validate recognition onthat platform). Since providing passwords is optional in data entry box183 c, some of the password entries in DB record structure 184 arerecorded as not-available (N/A) this indicating the user (e.g., 132)chose not to share this information. As an optional substep in step 173,the STAN_(—)2 system 110 may first grab the user-provided username (andoptional password) and test these for validity by automaticallypresenting them for verification to the associated outside platform(e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.). If the outside platformresponds that no such username and/or password is valid on that outsideplatform, the STAN_(—)2 system 110 flags an error condition to the userand does not execute step 174. Although exemplary record 184 is shown tohave only 3 rows of data entries, it is within the contemplation of thedisclosure to include further rows with additional entries such as,alternate UsrNm and password (optional) used on the same platform, username of best friend(s) on the same platform, user names of currentlybeing “followed” influential personas on the same platform, and so on.

In next step 175, the STAN_(—)2 system uses the obtained username (andoptional password and optional other information) for locating andbeginning to access the user's local and/or online (remote) friend,buddy, contacts, etc. lists (132L, 132R). The user may not want to haveall of this contact information imported into the STAN_(—)2 system forany of a variety of reasons. After having initially scanned theavailable contact information and how it is grouped or otherwiseorganized in the external storage locations, in next step 176 theSTAN_(—)2 system presents a set of import permission options to theuser, including the option of importing all, importing none andimporting a more specific and user specified subset of what was found tobe available. The user makes his selection(s) and then in next step 177,the STAN_(—)2 system imports the user-approved portions of theexternally available contact information into a STAN_(—)2 data storagearea (not shown). The STAN_(—)2 system checks for duplicates and removesthese.

Then in step 178 the STAN_(—)2 system converts the imported externalcontacts data into formats that conform to data structures used withinthe External STAN Profile records (131 p 2, 132 p 2) for that user. Withcompletion of step 178 for each STAN_(—)2 registered user (e.g., 131,132) who has allowed for external contacts information to be imported,the STAN_(—)2 system 110 can now automatically inform that user of whenhis friends, buddies, contacts, best friends, followed influentialpeople, etc. as named in external sites are already present within orare being co-invited to join a chat opportunity such as 315 b and 315 cin below described FIG. 3A. This kind of additional information (e.g.,displayed as 315 b 1 and 315 c 1 and 315 d 1 in FIG. 3A) may be helpfulto the user (e.g., 132) in determining whether or not he wishes toaccept a given in-STAN-vitation™ (e.g., a STAN-provided content sourcerecommendation like 315 b and/or 315 c) to view a recommended contentsource and/or to save (e.g., into 336) some associated data of thatgiven in-STAN-vitation™. Additionally, the External STAN Profile records(131 p 2, 132 p 2) for the corresponding user (e.g., 132) can now beused as part of the co-compatibility and desirability analysis when theSTAN_(—)2 system is automatically determining in the background therankings of chat or other connect-to opportunities that STAN_(—)2 systemmight be recommending to the user for example in the opportunitiesbanner area 315 of the display screen 300 shown in FIG. 3A (which area315 is incidentally optionally out-and-in scrollable as an opaque orshadow shade—described below) based on the monitored activities (e.g.,as reported by up- or in-loaded CFi's) of the user in for example, openwindows 317 (the user's FaceBook™ account data), 330 a (the user'sresearch results from using the GoogleWave™ tool) and 330 d (the user'sresearch results from using the GoogleGoggles™ tool).

When the STAN_(—)2 system 110 is processing various ones of possibleconnect-to recommendations (e.g., chat opportunities like 315 b) in thebackground to thereby determine which connect-to recommendations shouldbe ranked as highest priority for recommending to the user and which aslower ranked and thus perhaps not even presented, recommendations to theuser, the STAN_(—)2 system may be generating ranking scores based ondata provided in: (a) the user's Current Personality-based ChatCompatibility profiles (CpCCp's, as described in conjunction with giF.1B of the STAN_(—)1 application); (b) the user's Domain Specific CurrentChat compatibility Profiles (DsCCp's, as described in conjunction withgiF. 1C of the STAN_(—)1 application); (c) the user's Personal EmotionExpression Profile (PEEP, as described in conjunction with giF. 1E ofthe STAN_(—)1 application); and (d) the user's Current Focus Indicators(CFi's, as described in conjunction with giFs. 2A and 3C of theSTAN_(—)1 application). The STAN_(—)2 system 110 may becross-correlating data and/or preference rules extracted from suchCpCCp's (a), DsCCp's (b), PEEP's (c), CFi's (d) with attributes and/orjoinder rules of possibly matching topic nodes (such node 450′ of giF.3C) and/or on-topic chat rooms as defined within the STAN_(—)2 system'stopics tree (115 of FIG. 1A of this application, see also 215 of FIG.2). In one embodiment, the automated cross-correlating and automatedrecommendation making rules of the STAN_(—)2 system include rules (wherethese rules are configured for use by corresponding rule-drivenknowledge base algorithms) that are selectively activated if the userhas corresponding data contained in the user's External STAN Profilerecord (e.g., 131 p 2, 132 p 2).

One default, but over-rideable, knowledge base rule might say: IF user'sExternal STAN Profile record exists and includes imported FaceBook™friends AND topic node under consideration has at least one such friendconnected to that topic node THEN increase compatibility score of thattopic node by +1, and IF the topic node under consideration has at leastthree such friends now connected to that topic node THEN increasecompatibility score of that topic node by an additional +3. In otherwords, by default, the STAN_(—)2 system 110 automatically begins to givegreater preference toward recommending connect-to opportunities (e.g.,on-topic chat rooms) if the user's external site “friends” (and betteryet, “best friends”) are already connected to the content source that isbeing considered as a connect-to recommendation.

In one embodiment, premium subscription users of the STAN_(—)2 system110 are allowed to override the default external friends rules withspecific rules of their choosing or creation. It may be that a givenuser prefers not to be connected to (or given the recommendation to doso) to a content source (e.g., an online chat room) in accordance with auser provided exception rule such as: IF Topic=Vacation Plans ANDContacts already connected to potential content source (e.g., chat room)include LinkedIn™ contacts THEN add −5 to Recommendation Score. In otherwords, for a certain topic and/or if certain people are already at thetarget site (e.g., chat room), this user prefers to not connect to thatsite and/or not to have that content source recommended to him by theSTAN_(—)2 system. Specialized knowledge base rules that use data fromthe user's External STAN Profile record may be incorporated within theSTAN_(—)2 system into: (a) the user's Current Personality-based ChatCompatibility profiles (CpCCp's, see 175 of giF. 1B); (b) the user'sDomain Specific Current Chat compatibility Profiles (DsCCp's, see 195 ofgiF. 1C); and (c) the user's Personal Emotion Expression Profile (PEEP,see 199 of giF. 1E but add to it a friend-related rule such as: IF Ken54(TPP) is present THEN increase Gladness by +5). (Here, TPP stands forinfluential Tipping Point Persona as shall be better explainedimmediately below.)

In one embodiment, premium subscription users of the STAN_(—)2 systemare allowed to categorize their imported friends or other contacts, asfor example, “Tipping Point” Personalities (TPP's) and morespecifically, categorized as “Tipping Point” Early Adapter/Salesman,“Tipping Point” Maven and “Tipping Point” Influential Connector inconformance for example with the book, “The Tipping Point: How LittleThings Can Make a Big Difference” (ISBN 0-316-31696-2) by MalcolmGladwell, whose concepts are incorporated herein by reference. Asexplained in the book, “Tipping Point” people can be critical to gettingan emerging meme to take root and there are different categories of“Tipping Point” people: Salesmen, Mavens, and Connectors. Bycategorizing their imported friends using a categorizing function likethis of the STAN_(—)2 system 110, users enable the STAN_(—)2 system tospecially flag out such people with a TP icon (e.g., the flashing ToiletPaper icon at 315 f in FIG. 3A). Such system flagging of a given personas being a recognized TPP may be based on consensus voting by numeroususers instead of, or in addition to such designation by an individualuser. Consensus-wise elected TPP's may be specially flagged out assTPP's (super Tipping Point persons). Then if a user spots such aTPP-indicating icon (315 f) or an sTTP-indicating icon (not shown), theuser can elect to drag and drop an attribute of the Connect-toRecommendation (e.g., of Chat Opportunity 315 d) into a Favorites orSaved attributes list (e.g., 336 of FIG. 3A). In one embodiment, thesavable attributes include one or more of: (a) a link to the topic node(also called Topic Center or TC) that is associated with the Connect-toRecommendation; (b) an identification of another user such as a “TippingPoint” person 315 f displayed in associated with the Connect-toRecommendation; and (c) a link to the content source (e.g., Chat RoomD2—not shown but to be popped open if user double clicks on center areaof 315 d) that the Connect-to Recommendation (e.g., Chat Opportunity 315d) is recommending. In the example of FIG. 3A, the user is shown at 315e′ to be using his mouse (having counterpart hand icon 336 e) to dragand drop a copy of TC flag 315 e into the Saved Topic Centers area ofscrollable list 336. The user could have instead dragged and dropped acopy of TP icon 315 f or a copy of the Chat Opportunity border to list336. More will be said on this when FIG. 3A is discussed in yet furtherdetail.

Incidentally, “Tipping Point” Personalities (TPP's and sTPP's) are anonlimiting example of personas who may be logically linked to a givenchat room (e.g., pointed to by 315 d) or to another form of recommendedcontent source (e.g., a blog, a listserve, etc.) and/or who may belogically linked to a given topic center (TC) and/or to a given TCONE(topic center owned note exchange). Depending on topic and context,consensus-wise elected authors of publications (e.g., peer reviewedpublications), lecturers (e.g., college professors), expert witnesses(e.g., those who have testified in courtroom cases) and so on (includingmedical professional who specialize for example in esoteric diseases)may be so logically linked to a TC or TCONE within the STAN_(—)2 system110/210. One process that can usefully exploit such logical linking toTC's and/or TCONE's will be detailed when bounce back operation 229 c ofthe FIG. 2 is explained below. Briefly, in one example, a generalpractice physician who is trying to diagnose a patient with an unusualset of symptoms navigates to a medicine-related topic center (TC),retrieves identifications of topic center noted experts and thencontacts the experts in hopes of obtaining from them directly-on-topicadvice about the unusual set of symptoms.

Referring again to FIG. 1B, after an external list of friends, buddies,contacts and/or the alike have been imported for a first external socialnetworking (SN) platform (e.g., FaceBook™) and the imported contactidentifications have been optionally categorized (e.g., as TPP's and/orother), the process can be repeated for other external content resources(e.g., MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.). As a last step 179 a before exitingprocess 170 for each external resource, in one embodiment, the user isasked to schedule an updating task for later updating the importedinformation. Alternatively, the STAN_(—)2 system automatically schedulessuch an information update task. In yet another variation, the STAN_(—)2system alternatively or additionally, provides the user with a list ofpossible triggering events that may be used to trigger an update attemptat the time of the triggering event. Possible triggering events mayinclude, but are not limited to, detection of idle time by the user,detection of the user registering into a new external platform (e.g., asconfirmed in the user's email—i.e. “Thank you for registering intoplatform XP2, please record these as your new username and password . .. ”); detection of the user making a major change to one of his externalplatform accounts (e.g., again flagged by a STAN_(—)2 accessible emailthat says—i.e. “The following changes to your account settings have beensubmitted. Please confirm it was you who requested them . . . ”). When acombination of plural event triggers are requested such as accountsetting change and user idle mode, the user idle mode may be detectedwith use of a user watching webcam as well as optional temperaturesensing of the user wherein the user is detected to be leaning back, notinputting via a user interface device for a predefined number of secondsand cooling off after an intense session with his machine system. Ofcourse, the user can also actively request initiation (171) of anupdate. The information update task may be used to add data (e.g., username and password in 184) for newly registered into external platformsand new, nonduplicate contacts that were not present previously, todelete undesired contacts and/or to recategorize various friends,buddies, contacts and/or the alike as different kinds of “Tipping Point”persons (TPP's) and/or as other kinds of noteworthy personas. Theprocess then ends at step 179 b but may be re-begun at step 171 for yeta another external content source when the STAN_(—)2 system 110determines that the user is probably in an idle mode and is probablywilling to accept such a pushed survey 182.

Referring again to FIG. 1A, it may now be appreciated how some of themajor associations 111-114 can be enhanced by having the STAN_(—)2system 110 cooperatively interacting with external platforms (120, 141,etc.) by, for example, importing external contact lists of thoseexternal platforms. More specifically, the user-to-user associations(U2U) 111 can be strengthened by virtue of a displayed window such as300 of FIG. 3A being able to now alert the user as to when friends,buddies, contacts and/or the alike of an external platform (e.g., 141,144) are already associated with a displayed Connect-to Recommendation(e.g., 315 b, 315 c of FIG. 3A). The user-to-topic associations (U2T)112 can be strengthened by virtue of a displayed window such as 300 ofFIG. 3A being able to now show the viewing user how certain influentialindividuals (e.g., Ken54 TPP) are associated with a specific topiccenter (e.g., TC 315 e) due to their being associated with a Connect-toRecommendation (e.g., 315 d) that comes under the flag (315 e) of thattopic center (e.g., TC 315 e).

Referring next to FIG. 2, it will now be explained from a differentperspective how cross-pollination actions instigated by the STAN_(—)2system 110 can work to enhance (enhancement shown as action 121)user-to-user associations (U2U, 111), to enhance (122) user-to-topicassociations (U2T, 112), to expand/evolve (123) topic-to-topicassociations (T2T, 113), and to expand/evolve (124) topic-to-contentassociations (T2C, 114). Two platforms, 210 and 220 are respectivelyrepresented in the multiplatform space 200 of FIG. 2. A first of theplatforms, 210 (corresponding to 110 of FIG. 1A) is schematicallyrepresented as a 3-dimensional lower prismatic structure having arespective 3D axis frame 210 xyz. A second of the platforms, 220(corresponding to 120 of FIG. 1A) is schematically represented as a2-dimensional upper planar structure having respective 2D axis frame 220xy. Each of the first and second platforms, 210 and 220 is shown torespectively have a compilation-of-users-of-the-platform space, 211 and221; and a messaging-rings supporting space, 215 and 225 respectively.

The planar first platform 220 will be described first because it followsa conventional approach such as that of FaceBook™ and LinkedIn™ forexample. Assume first that the upper messaging-rings supporting space,225 of platform 220 is completely empty (it has no rings like 226). Asingle circle-creating user 203 starts things going by launching (forexample in a figurative boat 205) a nascent discussion proposal 206 fromspace 221 into space 225. In the LinkedIn™ environment this is known assimply starting a discussion by attaching a headline message to it(example: “What do you think about what the President said today?”) andpushing it (206 in its outward bound boat 205) out into the then emptyspace 225 where it can be seen by other members (e.g., 222) of apredefined Discussion Group 224. The launched discussion proposal 206transforms into a fixedly attached child ring 226 of parent node 226 p(attached with linking branch 227), where 226 p is merely an identifierof the Discussion Group but does not have message exchange rings like226 inside of it. Typically, child rings like 226 attach to growingbranch 227 according to date of attachment. The LinkedIn™ platform willthus have proposed discussions posted thereon according to date and IDof its launcher (e.g., posted 5 days ago by discussion leader Jones).

At this stage the launched and attached discussion proposal 226 has onlyone member of the discussion group 224 associated with it, namely, itssingle launcher 203. If no one else (e.g., a friend, a discussion groupco-member) joins into that solo-launched discussion proposal 226, itremains empty and just sits there, aging at its attached position alonggrowing branch 227 and under parent node 226 p. On the other hand, ifanother member 222 of the discussion group 224 jumps into (228) theaffixed discussion proposal 226 (e.g., “What do you think about what thePresident said today?”) by posting a responsive comment inside that ring226, for example, “Oh, I think what the President said today was good.”,then the discussion has begun. The discussion launcher/leader 203 maypost a counter comment or other members of the discussion group 224 mayalso jump in and add their comments. Irrespective of how many othermembers of the discussion group 224 jump into the ring 226 or laterleave the ring 226, that ring 226 stays affixed to the parent node 226 pin the historical position where it originally attached. Some discussionrings in LinkedIn™ can grow to have hundreds of comments and a likenumber of members commenting therein. Other launched discussion rings(206) of LinkedIn™ may remain forever empty while still remainingaffixed to the parent node in their historical position and having onlythe one discussion launcher 203 logically linked to that otherwise emptydiscussion ring.

It is to be understood that not all discussion group rings like 226 needto be carried out in a single common language such as lay-person'sEnglish. It is quite possible that some discussion groups conduct theirinternal exchanges in respective other languages such as, but notlimited to, German, French, Italian, Swedish, Japanese, Chinese orKorean. It is also possible that some discussion groups have members whoare multilingual and thus conduct internal exchanges within certaindiscussion groups with mixed use of several languages, for example,throwing in French or German loan phrases (e.g., Schadenfreude) into amostly English discourse where no English word quite suffices. It isalso possible that some discussion group keywords are of a mixed oralternate language type. It is also possible that some discussion groupshave members who are experts in certain esoteric arts (e.g., patent law,computer science, medicine, economics, etc.) and use art-based jargonthat lay persons not skilled in such arts would not normally understandor use.

The birth (instantiation) in the lower platform space 210 (correspondingto the STAN_(—)2 system 110) of a messaging ring (irrespective ofwhether its discourse is to be conducted in lay English, French or mixedlanguages or specialized jargon) is often (there are exceptions) asubstantially different affair. Firstly, a nascent messaging ring 208 isgenerally not launched by only one member of platform 210 but rather byat least two such members 207 (assumed to both be ordinary-Englishspeaking in this example). In other words, at the time of launch (offigurative boat 205′) the two or more launchers 207 of the nascentmessaging ring 208 have already agreed to enter into an ordinary-Englishbased discussion (or another form of “Notes Exchange” which is the NEsuffix of the TCONE acronym) within ring 208. Accordingly, as a generalrule, ring 208 never launches with a solo-rower and as ahaving-no-joined other members-therein ring, as its boat (205′) floatsinto the messaging-rings supporting space 215 of platform 220. Insteadand as a general proposition herein (there could be exceptions such asif one launcher immediately drops out for example or when a credentialedexpert launches a course-to-be taught ring), each nascent messaging ringlike 208 enters a corresponding ring-supporting and mapping (e.g.,indexing) space 215 while already having at least two members joined indiscussion (or in another form of mutually understandable “NotesExchange”) therein as its figurative boat 205′ sets temporary anchor ina not-fixed floating position within the topics supporting space 215 ofplatform 220. Discussion about how an initially launched (instantiated)and anchored (moored) Social Notes Exchange (SNE) can become a driftingone that swings from one anchoring node (TC) to a next, in other words,it become a dSNE 216 d will be provided shortly.

First however, it is to be observed that the birth of a messaging ring(e.g., 208) in the lower platform space 210 not only often involves atleast two joined launchers 207 (typically using a common and mutuallyunderstood exchange language, e.g., lay person's English) but also thatit involves the attachment of a temporary topic center flag 209 to thelaunched boat 205′. It is the two or more joined launchers 207 whoinitially decide (directly or indirectly; consciously or subconsciously)what the initial “topic” of their jointly launched messaging ring 208will be. The launched messaging ring 208 is not necessarily married forlife to one or more of its birthing launchers. All the initial launcherscan abandon ship (so to speak) and other STAN_(—)2 members can jumponboard and take control as new captains over the drift direction ofthat already launched messaging ring 208. This too will be explainedshortly. In one embodiment, each discussion ring (a.k.a. TCONE) withintopic space 215 is recorded by the STAN_(—)2 system as having a namedset of birthing launchers (e.g., 207) and first anchored position (birthplace), a named set of current anchor-controlling members (a.k.a.current captains, can be same 207 or different members) withcorresponding current anchored-to position or positions, and a named setof currently most influential mutineers who wish to drift the boat so itbecomes more so anchored (tethered) to one or more new positions(different TC's). These respective birthers (207), current captains andrebels (those seeking change of course and/or mooring points) can beidentified in many other ways besides by their user names (e.g., bySTAN_(—)2 issued unique user identification numbers). Stated otherwise,each TCONE is tracked where the tracking records store theidentifications of two or more of its initial parents and initial one ormore anchoring positions in topic space 215, identifications of one ormore of its current captains and current anchoring positions in topicspace (plus optionally, current drift direction) and identifications ofone or more of its want-to-be-new captains and their desired newanchoring position(s) in topic space (plus optionally, new driftdirection).

It is assumed that when original launchers 207 first join in a NotesExchange session (or are invited by STAN_(—)2 to do so), each launcherhas a respective, on-topic thought pattern (207 a and 207 brespectively, and not necessarily expressed verbally and/or visually) inhis her mind. The on-topic portion of the thought pattern (207 a or 207b) may be subconscious or conscious or both. Each launcher is understoodto “encode” his respective on-topic thought pattern(s) (207 a and 207 b)with a corresponding one or more topic-directed and objectivelydetectable “encodings” (207 aa and 207 bb respectively). A nonlimitingexample of such encodings may be a respective keyword proposed by eachlauncher for what the topic is “about”. More specifically, launcher-Amight first say, ‘I think the keyword for our shared topic is Apples’while launcher-B might first say, ‘I think the keyword for our sharedtopic is Oranges’ and thereafter they may agree that a better set ofkeywords for defining the topic of their mutually launched TCONE (208)is ‘Apples, Oranges and like fruit’. Later, if the instantiated boat istaken over by new captains, they may redefine what topic(s) the launchedboat most closely is tethered to as being ‘all fruit’. This of course,is a relatively simplistic example. If the boat's topic is switched to‘all fruit’, the machine-implemented definition of what topic node(s)the boat is now tethered to may jump up a level in a hierarchical topictree where ‘Apples’ and ‘Oranges’ are two discrete topic nodes that arechildren of broader and thus parent, “All Fruits” topic node.

Keyword-based encoding of the topic definition (as agreed to implicitlyor explicitly by discussion boat launchers 207) is but one of manyoptions. Another for-example could be pictures or sounds. Launcher-Amight first explicitly or implicitly indicate (e.g., through his up- orinloaded CFi's): ‘I think attached image-A and SoundTrack-A bestrepresent our common topic’. On the other hand, Launcher-B might firstexplicitly or implicitly indicate: ‘No, I think attached image-B andSoundTrack-C best represent our common topic’. As indicated, theencodings of the on-topic thought patterns may be generated consciously,subconsciously or by both ways. Uploaded (or in-loaded) CFi's and CVi'sfrom TCONE members who currently control topic definition may becombined (through a voting process or otherwise) to implicitly indicatethe consensus topic definition. More generally speaking, topic definingand/or topic-directed “encodings” (207 aa and 207 bb) may be expressedin the form of any one or more encoded (and thus storable andtransmittable) expression-representing signals including, but notlimited to, on-topic keywords; on-topic tags; on-topic meta-tags;on-topic graphic images; on-topic whole or partial content pointed to bya URL; on-topic sound tracks; on-topic haptics (e.g., tactilesensations) on-topic kinesics (e.g., muscles tensings), on-topicolfactics (e.g., smells, tastes as detected and characterized bystandardized chemical sniffing or tasting devices), identifications ofkey (e.g., famous) persons associated with the topic and theirassociation to it, hyper-links to the foregoing, and so on. As alreadyexplained in the here incorporated STAN_(—)1 application, up- orin-loaded CFi's and CVi's may be used to automatically convey thesevarious expressible encodings to an automated encodings-weighting andencodings-processing device that then automatically defines the probable“initial topic” for each launcher (of respective thought patterns 207 a,207 b) based on predetermined profiles (e.g., CpCCp's, DsCCp's) of therespective launchers 207. Often there will be at least one or morecommon encodings (207 cc) that are shared by the launchers 207 (e.g.,“fruit”) because, for example, they both encoded with a same keywordand/or a same tag/meta-tag and/or by emotively focusing on same whole orpartial content (e.g., an image of a fruit store) pointed to by a commonURL or equivalent URL's pointing to similar content or because theirrespective but different encodings (207 a, 207 b) nonetheless logicallygroup under a same encompassing other encoding 207 dd (e.g., apples andoranges are fruit) where the definition of the encompassing encoding(e.g., fruit) and its encompassed sub-encodings (e.g., apples, oranges,bananas) is stored in DB 119, maintained therein (automatically updated)and automatically consulted by the STAN_(—)2 system 220. The precedingare non-limiting examples. The STAN_(—)2 system 210 can use the commonencodings 207 cc and/or its own logical linked and augmenting-wiseprovided and/or encompassing encoding(s) 207 dd to automaticallydetermine where in topic space 215 the initially launched topic 209initially should be tethered to.

Yet another example of not-just-word-based encoding of topic definitionmay play out like this. A first jazz musician is sitting at his musickeyboard in a New Orleans Cajun restaurant (he's getting ready fortonight's show) and taking in the sights, sounds, smells (e.g., cookingsmells) and tastes (e.g., nibbling on a Cajun dish before him) of hisenvironment and because of that he gets a notion for a new variation ona jazz musical score he had been collaborating with a friend acrosstown. He calls up his friend using his newest convergence type palm-helddata processing device (in the nature of an advanced iPhone™, Android™device) and says, ‘Turn on your sniff-onometer, I want you to feel thisand help me out with this new musical idea I have’. H is friend'sconvergence type palm-held or forearm worn data processing device has astandardized chemical sniffing/tasting device built into it (e.g., usingMEMs style chemical detection technology) that outputs chemicalcomposition detection and concentration signals similar to those of thefirst musician's device whereby, as the second musician moves around aCajun kitchen he happens to work at, he can find a spot that smell-wiseand/or taste-wise feels roughly the same as that of the first musician.This is so because the two convergence type palm-held data processingdevices can upload respective chemical signature signals to a common andautomated analysis and comparison machine system (e.g., included in oneembodiment of the STAN_(—)2 system 210) and the smell/taste analysis andcomparison machine system can feedback indications of how far aparttheir surrounding smell/taste environments are. A high quality audiopick up on the first musician's palm-held or forearm worn dataprocessing device relays the new music track he is playing to the soundoutput of the second musician's wireless device where the relay flowsthrough the STAN_(—)2 system (of this embodiment). At least one of themusicians has his STAN-monitoring control (like 312 of FIG. 3A) turnedON. This means that the STAN_(—)2 system is monitoring the CFi's up orin-loaded from that at least one musician's and is looking forcorresponding chat or other Notes Exchange sessions to recommend asbeing intuitively on-topic. The up or in-loaded CFi's include the soundtracks and sniff-onometer's output signals. The STAN_(—)2 systemautomatically infers from the encodings (see again 207 aa) it isreceiving from the at least one being-monitored musician's device andfrom his personal profiles (e.g., DsCCp's) that his current on-mindtopic is most likely experimental jazz and that he probably would liketo share the on-topic experience with other co-compatible jazz musicianswho are also currently being similarly monitored by the STAN_(—)2system. As a result, the STAN_(—)2 system automatically finds a thirdjazz musician who is at the moment substantially on-topic (based on hisup or in-loaded and possibly nonverbal encodings) with the first twojazz musicians and automatically makes a recommendation (e.g., like 315d of FIG. 3A) that they should virtually connect based on their currentco-compatibilities as to topic and direction of its development. As aresult, all three musicians collaborate and come up with a new musicinnovation.

It is to be understood that the above example of three collaboratingmusicians could instead have involved collaborating chefs whoseconvergence type palm-held or forearm worn data processing devices withstandardized chemical sniffing/tasting devices built into them also hadradiant temperature detectors as well as steam tolerant webcams so thatthe chefs can cross-exchange nonverbal notes about cooking temperatures,odors and visuals of their ongoing cooking efforts with one anotheron-the-fly and so that an embodiment of the STAN_(—)2 system 210 canrecommend online joinder with similarly situated other chefs, therebyproviding for online meeting and collaboration based at least in part onnonverbal encodings. And of course, over-the-net jamming musicians andover-the-net collaboratively cooking chefs are but two examples of manyother such cross-collaborations that can be instigated on the basis ofnonverbal encodings (e.g., optionally within 207 aa and 207 bb of FIG.2). Other examples of cross-collaborations that might be instigated bythe STAN_(—)2 system on the basis of nonverbal encodings may include:wine tasters, cigar smokers, bird watchers (who use long distance soundpickups) and clothing or other apparel buyers. In the case ofclothing/apparel buyers, the specific textures (haptically detected andanalyzed) of different cloths or other worn materials may be animportant factor as well as possibly smells and visuals. Thus in thelatter cases, their convergence type palm-held or forearm worn dataprocessing devices with standardized chemical sniffing/tasting devicesbuilt into them may also have standardized texture detecting andreporting devices incorporated into them where the texture reportingsignals are up or in-loaded into the STAN_(—)2 system so that remoteseekers of same or similar clothes and/or other apparels (e.g., shoes,purses, etc.) may compare their findings online with similarlyinterested, co-compatible and STAN_(—)2 found users. The palm-held orforearm worn data processing devices may also include software means fordeciphering 2D and/or 3D (e.g., holographic) bar codes and up orin-loading those to the STAN_(—)2 system so that brand name products canbe compared based on online specifications. More specifically, thescenario may play out like this. A shopaholic is out shopping at herfavorite apparel store for a new sweater, blouse, shoes, etc. She findssomething that appears to be of value but she is not sure about priceand quality. Her iPhone™ like device has a cloth texture feeler andcloth chemicals sniffer. She uses an embodiment of the STAN_(—)2 systemto hook up (via chat room or otherwise) with a similar but remoteshopaholic who is studying a similar item of similar texture, chemicaloff-gassing attributes and in roughly the same price range. Theyexchange notes and each decides based on those exchanged notes whetherto buy her being-examined item. This is another example where spacedapart users of the STAN_(—)2 system who may previously be strangers toone another can nonetheless find one another for mutually beneficial(e.g., mutually supportive) sharing of experience and of impressionsabout things that are of current interest to both (or all) of them.

Referring back to the TCONE-birthing parents 207 of FIG. 2 and for sakeof simplicity, let it be assumed that launching parents 207 have agreed(by consensus, e.g., by means of commonly shared encodings 207 cc and/orencompassing but STAN_(—)2 provided encoding(s) 207 dd) that theirlaunched ring 208 should initially buoy itself (tether itself) to apre-existing topic center 219 a located as a “topic node” somewhere on ahierarchical topics tree data structure maintained in space 215 by thesupporting platform 210 (where 210 can be 110 of FIG. 1A and where topicspace 215 is defined by data records stored in database (DB) 119 ofsystem 110). When their boat 205′ arrives and anchors at topic center219 a, the launchers may be surprised to discover that there are otherrings already moored to (tethered to), or stacked up along a Z-axis pole219 a of that topic space location. The launchers' ring 208 will beautomatically stacked up by the STAN_(—)2 system onto that shared Z-axispole 219 a along with other rings that have chosen for themselves(directly or indirectly) to anchor at that same “topic node”. For sakeof example, let us assume that the collectively defined topic of sharedZ-axis pole 219 a is: “What do you think about what the President saidtoday?” (Common keywords or tags for this topic might include the words:U.S.A., President, speech and latest.) However, not all rings (216 a)stacked up on Z-axis pole 219 a are the same in their respectiveattributes. Some of the messaging rings (or “TCONEs” as they arealternatively here referred to) require all members inside thatmessaging ring to have a high degree of expertise in the subject matterthat the President was talking about (let it be assumed to be foreignaffairs). Such expertise demanding rings may be visualized as havingrelatively small diameters because only a rare few members qualify toenter into discussion within that ring (e.g., chat room). By contrast,others of the “topic center owned note exchanges” (TCONEs) 216 a mayhave much looser restrictions on who can enter the ring (e.g., chatroom) and participate in its discussion. The latter may be visualized ashaving relatively larger diameters because a larger number of membersqualify to enter into discussion within those less restrictive rings.

The stacked collection of rings (TCONEs) 216 a centered on the Za pole219 a (where such stacking implies that pole 219 a is the controlling orprimary tethering node for those rings) may be visualized as forming a3D cone composed of removable hoops or rings of varying diameters. Forany given Z-pole in topic space 215 there does not have to be a hoop atthe Z=0 level and hoops may be disposed in negative Z territory as wellas or in opposition to other hoops disposed in positive Z territory.More specifically and by way of example, hoops in positive Z territorymay be constrained to discussion groups that lean one way politicallyand hoops in negative Z territory may be constrained to discussiongroups that lean in an opposed direction politically. This is just anexample. The stacked hoops do not have to form a cone shape (i.e. asingle cone) in any given territory of the Z-axis. There could becylinders, undulating forms and so on. It would have been convenient ifthe acronym, TCONE corresponded to the 3D cone shown at 219 a. But itdoes not. The TCONE, or more fully, the Topic Center Owned Note Exchangering, is just one Z-pole ringing hoop (or tethered thereto hoop) among apotentially large number of other such figurative hoops that arecurrently (but not necessarily permanently) primarily “owned” by theTopic Center (TC) 219 a.

Because in the general case, the topic center Z-pole 219 a can have alarge number of primarily-owned TCONEs hooped onto it, the topic centerZ-pole 219 a can have a life of its own that becomes independent of thelife of any one TCONE hooped around it. A topic center Z-pole 219 a canstart to “drift” in one direction on an XY plane of 3D axis 210 xyzwhile one or a few (but not all) of its hoops (i.e. drift-apart hoop 216d) drift off in an opposed direction and attach more strongly to (tetherto) other Z-poles. The mechanisms that make this possible are alreadyspelled out in the here incorporated STAN_(—)1 application and thus willnot be repeated. The STAN_(—)1 application described the phenomenon asakin to a Tarzan character using vines to swing from one tree to a next,where at one point in the swing the Tarzan character can of coursesimultaneously be holding onto the vines of two trees. Briefly and inmore detail, members of an individual TCONE (e.g., a chat room) can voteto change the definition of topic of their individual TCONE (e.g., 216d). At the same time the collective members of a stack of TCONEs hoopedaround one topic center Z-pole 219 a can collectively vote to change thedefinition of topic of their collectively hooped Z-pole 219 a.Accordingly, a rogue individual TCONE (e.g., 216 d) can drift off in onedirection and the rest of the hooped Z-pole 219 a can drift off in adifferent direction. In one embodiment, the controlling majority ofmembers whose TCONEs are hooped around a given topic node (a.k.a. TC)such as that of Z-pole 219 a can vote implicitly (e.g., with theirCVi's) and/or explicitly so as to constantly and dynamically redefinehow the topic of the TC is encoded (e.g., via its Top N keywords, itsTop N′ meta-tags, its Top P pointers (e.g., URL's) to on-topic contentand so on).

In the STAN_(—)2 system (as represented by lower space 210 of FIG. 2), aregistered member (e.g., 212) can be in-STAN-vitated™ to join arecommended one TCONE among the stack 216 a of TCONEs hooped onto Z-pole219 a. Briefly, this is done in the embodiment 300 of FIG. 3A (detailedbelow) by the user double-clicking (opening up) on a banner-displayedTweetView-Opportunity glyph such as 315 a, in which case a correspondingcontent displaying window like 316 a opens up (could be a Tweet™ streaminstead of a chat room transcript) and the invitation accepting user canthen view content provided by, and/or can interact with the membersalready linked with the content of the newly-opened window 316 a. Thisis an example of a STAN_(—)2 member entering into the discussion ring ofa given TCONE. (In one embodiment, each so-opened Notes Exchangesession; e.g., Room A0 (316 a), Room B3 (316 b), has a topic center flaggadget (e.g., 316 aa, 316 bb respectively) attached to it and, as willbe better detailed for flag gadget 315 e below, activation of the TCflag gadget initiates navigation to a corresponding topic node in systemtopic space.) As indicated in exemplary banner 315, the opened NotesExchange session can be a Tweet™ stream (315 a), or an instant chat room(315 b), or a blog commenting area (icon not shown in therecommendations banner area 315) or any other appropriate onlinemechanism by way of which members can exchange on-topic notes, data,pointers, etc. with one another in real time or over prolonged periodsof time (e.g., in the sense for example of chess players exchanging nextmoves with one another by way of once-a-day emails). In one embodiment,prior to opening up a Notes Exchange session such as 316 a (Room A0) bydouble clicking on a headline recommendation (e.g., 315 a) of banner315, the user may first actuate (e.g., by left clicking on it) anencoding inquiry tool portion of the recommendation (e.g., 315 a) suchas by actuating the boxed question mark tool 315 a 5 of headlinerecommendation area 315 a. In response to this actuation, the userinterface mechanism automatically presents an indication (e.g.,connection flaring 315 a 6) of which, on-screen one or more keywords(e.g., 315 a 7), tags or other encodings are being deemed as beingprimarily representative of the topic of the correspondingly headlinedTweetView-Opportunity (315 a) or of the corresponding other such contentsource recommendation (e.g., 315 b, 315 c, 315 d). In the illustratedexample, actuation of the encoding inquiry tool 315 a 5 causes a colorcoded and translucent connection flaring 315 a 6 to be temporarilydisplayed while at the same time the corresponding on-screen encoding(e.g., keyword 315 a 7) is also highlighted (e.g., color reversed, orflashed or otherwise differentially flagged out). Release of depressionof the mouse button and/or removal of the cursor from hovering over theencoding inquiry tool 315 a 5 causes the temporarily flared connectionbeam (315 a 6) to disappear and also the temporary flagging (315 a 7) ofthe corresponding encoding (e.g., key.a5) to be undone. In an alternateembodiment, the temporarily flared connection beam 315 a 6 is notpresented and instead only the corresponding encoding (e.g., key.a5) istemporarily flagged out (315 a 7). In the same or an alternateembodiment, depressing the keyboard Control key while hovering over anyboxed question mark tool (like 315 a 5 of glyph 315 a) of any of thepresented content source recommendations (e.g., 315 b, 315 c, 315 d)causes differently colored connection beams (like 315 a 6) from all therespective recommendation glyphs to extend from those glyphs to allcorresponding topic-related encodings then present on the screen. Thus auser can quickly tell, if he wants to, which on-screen encodings (e.g.,keywords, tags, images, etc.) belong to a given one or more of the thenpresented recommendations (e.g., 315 a, 315 b, 315 c, 315 d).

It is also within the contemplation of the present disclosure to havethe logical link between a given encoding and a corresponding one ormore recommendation glyphs (e.g., 315 a, 315 b, 315 c, 315 d)temporarily light up (e.g., with use of a reverse flaring beam like 315a 6) when the user hovers the cursor (335) over a selected and potentialencoding (e.g., 315 a 7) and the user hits a predefined hot keyscombination. If the suspected encoding (e.g. key.a5) is indeed logicallylinked to one or more of the then displayed recommendation glyphs (e.g.,315 a) the suspected encoding becomes temporarily flagged out (e.g.,with flag out mechanism 315 a 7) and the reverse connection beam (like315 a 6) flares from the suspected encoding to the correlatedrecommendation glyphs (e.g., 315 a). If the suspected encoding (e.g.key.a5) is not logically linked to any of the recommendation glyphs thenbasically nothing happens (the user's compute may however sound afailure bell tone). Logical linkage between a suspected encoding (e.g.key.a5) and its corresponding recommendation glyphs (e.g., 315 a, 315 b,315 c, 315 d) may be temporarily indicated in a variety of other waysincluding a case where the reverse flaring beam (like 315 a 6) is notdisplayed.

In one embodiment, the nature and type of each Notes-Exchange that isbeing recommended in the recommendations banner area 315 (an optionallyscrollable area) of FIG. 3A is indicated by a showing of a given title(e.g., as shown in 315 c) for the corresponding content and by showingof an appropriate Notes Exchange session-type indicating icon. Forexample, an icon showing a singing bird 315 a 2 may be displayed asattached to the Tweet™ recommending area 315 a to intuitively indicateto the user that this recommended content source points to a Tweet™ orto a stream of on-topic Tweets. By way of another example, a pair oftalking balloon heads 315 b 2 may be displayed as attached to the chatroom recommending area 315 b to intuitively indicate to the user thatthis content source recommendation 315 b logically links to acorresponding on-topic chat room (which room will be automaticallyopened and displayed in side area 316 a-316 f of the screen if the userdouble clicks on recommendation providing area 315 b). In oneembodiment, a wide variety of intuitive type-of-source indicators andgadget icons may be displayed as being attached to a correspondingcontent source recommendation glyph. For example, source recommendationglyph 315 c is shown to have the talking balloon heads 315 c 2 attachedto it as well as a transcript recording gadget 315 c 3 and a BuZZ-Megadget 315 c 4. Moreover, source recommendation glyph 315 d is shown tohave TC gadget 315 e attached to it as well as transcript recordinggadget 315 r and temperature-indicating gadget 315 g and a TP flag 315f. Some of these indicators or gadgets have been described above andsome may be described in more detail below. Displaying all indicators orgadgets at once can create undesired clutter in the recommendationsbanner area 315. Accordingly, in one embodiment, the user is givenaccess to a banner display options menu (not shown) through which theuser can specify which indicators or gadgets are to be displayed and ifso, in what manner (e.g., large icons, small icons, with or without textlabels, with or without unique color codings, etc.). In one embodiment,when the user hovers his cursor (e.g., 335) over, or right clicks on thedesired source recommending (source headlining) glyph (e.g., 315 b, 315c, 315 d), one of the options displayed to the user is that ofcontrolling settings for all, or specific types of source recommendingglyphs where the settings specify what indicators or gadgets will bedisplayed by default for that type and if so, in what manner. Anotheroption is that of now showing all indicators or gadgets for thehovered-over or right-clicked on recommendation glyph as being attachedto that glyph or alternatively displayed in a sideline frame (notshown).

In the illustrated example of the recommendations-providing banner 315,the banner is organized like a top-headlines showing, multi-columnnewspaper (e.g., a four column headlined format in the case of FIG. 3A)where a headlining having the implied message of“click-here-to-read-more” is provided in the displayed horizontallyextending area of banner 315 in the form of a limited number ofcurrently hottest and headlined recommendations (e.g., the four shownrespectively at 315 a, 315 b, 315 c, 315 d). Banner 315 acts as a sortof hottest-now radar screen that lets the user know what additionalNotes Exchange sessions (besides the sessions already popped open on hismain screen, e.g., at 316 a, 316 b, 317) the user might want to take alook at because those additional Notes Exchange sessions (a.k.a. in oneform as chat opportunities) are now deemed by the STAN_(—)2 system to beon-topic with what currently uploading CFi's are indicating as being thetopics that are now most prominent on the user's mind. If a newer topicshifts into the apparent top focused upon ones of the user (because hisCFi's have started implying the newer topic) and one of the previous toptopics drops out of favor (again because the user's latest CFi's havestarted implying that) then the falling out of favor headline (one ofrecommendations 315 a, 315 b, 315 c, 315 d) is seen to slowly fall downin its respective newspaper column while a newer headline descends totake its place in the respective, newspaper like column. In this way theuser is given the intuitive understanding that the previousrecommendation (the before headline) has dropped down in rating and thenewer one has dropped in to take its place. However, if the user wantsto keep the older, or before recommendation—say it is 315 b—still on histop headlines row of banner 315, in one embodiment, the user clicks onthe down scroll arrow of arrow pair 315 b 45 and the olderrecommendation scrolls back up while a bottom piece of the newerrecommendation remains displayed in that newspaper-like column to remindthe user there is newer and deemed more “hot” recommendation awaitingabove. The user may later click on the up-pointing scroll arrow of arrowpair 315 b 45 to see the next newer one, or even one above that, asdesired. Each of the newspaper-like columns of banner 315 has its ownrespective set of up and down scroll control arrows like the arrow pair315 b 45 identified in opportunity recommending area 315 b. In theillustrated example, the separations between the newspaper-like columnsof banner 315 are indicated by thickened separation lines (verticallines) 315 v. Left and right pointing arrow tools to the left (315 z)and to the right (315 zz) of the four central newspaper-like columns ofbanner 315 allow the user to see other side columns which the STAN_(—)2system is determining to be less on-topic with what the user probablyhas in mind. Sometimes, of course, the STAN_(—)2 system can be wrong inits guesses as to what specific topics (e.g., top 1, 2, 3 or 4 topics)are on the user's mind and by scrolling left (315 z) or right (315 zz)and clicking on one of those off-center newspaper-like columns, the userimplicitly lets the STAN_(—)2 system know (and lets the STAN_(—)2 systemadaptively alter itself accordingly) that it is the more sidelined topicthat the user actually had in mind.

The exemplary newspaper-like headlined columns format of banner 315 isjust one of many possible formats that can be used and is not to be seenas limiting. In one embodiment, the user is allowed to change the banner(e.g., 315) to have a different format, for example, a four quadrantPicture-in-Picture format where the four quadrant PiP structure (notshown) floats as a moveable and resizeable window on the main screen 300along with other windows like windows 317, 330 a and 330 d.

Still referring to the method wherein the user double-clicks on (andthus indicates a desired opening up operation) on a banner-displayedTweetView-Opportunity recommendation glyph such as 315 a, there is amore advanced action that a STAN_(—)2 member can take. Rather thanjumping right into the midst of a system-recommended first TCONE (e.g.,one recommended by a glyph such as 315 a or 315 d), the user can electto instead navigate himself to the primary Z-pole 219 a (herein alsoreferred to as the topic center or topic node) of the system-recommendedTCONE and to browse about the neighborhood of that primary Z-pole 219 a(or optionally about the neighborhood of a secondary Z-pole if the TCONEis tethered to more than one). Such a navigating to, and browsing aboutoperation, may encompass the STAN_(—)2 system generating a 3D or 2Ddisplayable image that maps the TC or TCONE neighborhood onto a localview screen for viewing by the user. The displayed map image may verywell include coned shaped 3D structures such as that shown 219 a of FIG.2. The displayed map image may also include 3D fractal structures suchas that represented by glyph 216 f, where the latter will be describedbelow. The STAN_(—)2 system generated representation of its topic space215 may of course take on other forms including, but not limited to,two-dimensional or multi-dimensional tabular representations.

In one embodiment, each system-recommended Social Notes Exchange (SNE;a.k.a. discussion ring or TCONE) that is iconically recommended on theuser's data processing device (e.g., CPU-1 of FIG. 1A) also has a gadgeticon connected to it that represents the location of the topic center(the TC prefix of the TCONE acronym) within the topic nodes tree map(215) of the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210. More specifically, in FIG. 3A,the TC flag 315 e that pokes up from the block representing ChatOpportunity A2 (315 d) may be double clicked on and then in response thesystem automatically displays a section of the topics tree map (215) tothe user that shows the corresponding Z-pole 219 a and the TCONEs thatare currently tethered to that pole, and also some neighboring poleslike Zb (219 b) and the TCONEs that are currently tethered to that otherpole. In one embodiment, the TC flag icon 315 e includes a circle and across-hair centered on that circle so as to intuitively indicate that itflags out a center point. Right clicking on the flag icon 315 e providesthe user with some synopsis information about the targeted topic node(e.g., 219 a, 219 b) without yet opening up a map of the correspondingarea in the topic nodes space (215). More specifically, the synopsisinformation may provide the user with a name and brief description ofthe topic of that TC (topic center), an indication of how many TCONEs(e.g., chat rooms or other Social Notes Exchanges (SNEs)) are currentlytethered to that TC, and an indication of various TCONE entryrestrictions (example: “Minimum level of expertise needed to enter leastrestrictive chat room here is High School Diploma, Minimum level ofexpertise needed to enter most restrictive chat room here is PhD inWorld History”).

Once a user (e.g., 212) has navigated his way (e.g., via path 218 ofFIG. 2) to the Z-pole (219 a) of a chosen topic center, the user mayrequest admittance into any one of the displayed TCONEs (e.g., chatrooms). In one embodiment, Premium service subscribers to the STAN_(—)2system get to see more displayed TCONEs than base service registrants.In one embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system automatically prevents displayto a user (e.g., 212) who has navigated to a TC point on the map 215 ofTCONEs which the user clearly cannot gain participating admittance intobecause his currently active user profiles (e.g., CpCCp's, DsCCp's) andmore current CFi's indicate he does not qualify to enter and/or he wouldnot want to enter. A user (e.g., 212) who has navigated (218) to a TCpoint on the map 215 of TCONEs may not succeed in gaining entry as anactive participant (with commenting privileges) into one or more of thedisplayed TCONEs for any number of reasons including, but not limitedto, that the limit of allowed active participants in that TCONE (ring)has been reached or that the user does not meet the stringentrestriction rules established for participating entry or evenwatching/lurking entry into that TCONE. For those TCONEs that the usermanages to obtain at least watching/lurking entry into, the user canlearn the user names of the active participants in that TCONE and cansee (or otherwise perceive, or get a copy of) what they are discussingor otherwise exchanging notes about (including on-topic content dataand/or links to on-topic content data and/or links to other on-topic ornear-topic nodes of mapped space 215 and, in one embodiment, to nodes ofoutside platform space 225 that are on-topic or near-topic).

A user (e.g., 212) who has navigated his way (e.g., via path 218 of FIG.2) to the Z-pole (e.g., 219 a, 219 b) of a chosen topic center, need notrequest admittance into any one of the displayed TCONEs (e.g., chatrooms) in order to make use of the visited topic center (TC, a.k.a.Z-pole). Many of the topic centers (a.k.a. topic nodes) will have theirown content and pointers to content where the topic center's contentand/or pointers are directed to the general topic of that topic centerand access to this material is not restricted by potential accessrestrictions of specific TCONEs now tethered to that TC. Aside fromhaving its own (not TCONE controlled) content and pointers, a visited TCmay have, as logically linked thereto and stored as such in the DB 119,various encodings (e.g., keywords, tags, meta-tags, etc.) that definethe general topic of that TC taken in whole (in the averaged aggregate)as opposed to the in-TCONE topic definitions of specific ones of therings now tethered to that TC. A user who is browsing just to the TCitself and not into any of the specific TCONEs currently owned by the TCmay take advantage of the TC's general on-topic content and/or topicdefinitions.

The following is an exemplary but non-limiting example of such usage. Ageneral practice physician (GP MD) has a patient who has been takingdrugs D and P for a long time to treat chronic conditions. Howeverrecently, the patient has begun to exhibit allergic reactions to drug P,this indicating that P is now Poisonous in so far as the allergicallyreacting patient is concerned. The GP MD is thinking about prescribing anew drug named N to the patient to replace the now poisonous P. Howeverthe GP MD is worried about possible adverse interactions as betweendrugs D and N. Usage of the combination of the D and N is not widespreadin the population and thus there are no generally-available guidelineson such a unique drug combination (D and N). The GP MD is not sure howto phrase a keyword search looking for esoteric online articles aboutunique drug combination D+N. The GP MD uses the STAN_(—)2 system tonavigate (browse) to a topic node (a TC) that has both of D and N as itskeywords are other primary encodings (e.g., as its tags, meta-tags,etc.). When browsing at such a topic center (e.g., Z-pole 219 a), the GPMD finds additional keywords, tags, meta-tags, etc. that the physicianfeels will be useful for isolating esoteric online content addressinghis unique problem. While still logically linked to this TC, the GP MDuser requests instantiation and launch of a so-called Me-Serving SearchBOT (see 255 of FIG. 2) from that TC and on behalf of himself. Inresponse, the STAN_(—)2 system automatically asks the GP MD to specifythe primary encodings (e.g., keywords, tags, meta-tags, etc.) that willbe loaded into a mission guiding data structure of the to be launched,Me-Serving Search BOT (255).

A better representation of such a mission guiding data structure isprovided as icon 116 b in FIG. 1A and shown to be logically linked to aninstantiated BOT 116 a being launched from node 115 x of the STAN_(—)2system 110. When a BOT 116 a (a virtual robotic or software agent) isarmed with such a mission guiding data structure 116 b and launched assuch a combination (116 a plus 116 b) from the corresponding launchpoint (e.g., 115 x), the launched BOT combination 116 a/116 b may beviewed as morphing into a launched CPAP 117 (a Cross-PollinatingArtificial Persona). The logically attached mission guiding datastructure (116 b) may instruct the CPAP 117 as to where out there onvast territory of the Internet 101 to start searching and how to searchand what to look for. More will be said about this below in conjunctionwith FIGS. 4C-4D. However, for purpose of the present hypothetical wherethe GP MD user has asked the STAN_(—)2 system to launch a Me-ServingSearch BOT (255), the identification of the requesting user is logicallyattached to the launched BOT and the BOT is aimed towards out-of-STANand/or in-STAN content sources that the visited TC (e.g., 219 a)generally points to as having on-topic content (e.g., its Top P pointersto on-topic content sources). Accordingly, the launched Me-ServingSearch BOT (e.g., 255) is being pointed to search areas that havelikelihood of possessing on-topic content (because those areas have beenvetted to be such on-topic content sources by earlier users of thevisited TC, e.g., 219 a). At the same time the launched Me-ServingSearch BOT is loaded with a search-narrowing specific search requestformulated by the GP MD user and thus the Me-Serving Search BOT willsearch the probably on-topic areas for presence of the more narrowlydefined and specifically sought content. In one embodiment, theSTAN_(—)2 system automatically augments the specific search requestformulated by the GP MD user, for example by adding cross-languagetranslations and cross-disciplinary frame translations to the missionguiding data structure (116 b). That aspect will be explained below inconjunction with FIGS. 4C-4D. When the launched Me-Serving Search BOT(a.k.a. CPAP) returns to the node (e.g., TC 219 a) from which it wasoriginally launched, an email or alike other alert is automatically sentto the search requesting GP MD user to let him know useful results maynow be available.

The package contents 256 brought back by the returning Me-Serving SearchBOT 255 will all be accessible to the user (the general practicephysician or GP MD) who requested its specific instantiation andlaunching. In one embodiment, the alert email sent to the GP MD includesa first hyperlink to the TC or TCONE (216 c) from within whosejurisdiction the user requested the launching and a second hyperlink toall the returned contents 256 being brought back by the automated BOT255. Using the second hyperlink, the user can browse through thereturned material 256 and determine whether any of it helps answer hisproblem. The returned material 256 may include, but is not limited to:(a) hyperlinks to external platform nodes (e.g., 226) whose contentcross-correlated well with the user's search criteria, (b) lists of thealternate keywords or alternate encodings which the user may wish toemploy in the future within his search criteria in place of, or inadditional to the keywords and/or other encodings he submitted, (c)identifications of STAN_(—)2 internal user names and/or of user names onexternal platforms (where names are attached to external platform ID)where postings by those users appear to cross-correlated well with theuser's search criteria, and (d) short summaries or synopses orbiographies of the found on-topic material and on-topic other users. Therequest generating GP MD may then go through this returned material anddetermine which is on-point and credible and which, in his opinion, isto be rejected. Additionally, the request generating GP MD may nextformulate an improved search request based on the BOT-returned material256. Alternatively or additionally, the request generating GP MD may tryto contact the other users whose user names (or other ID's) werereturned by the Me-Serving Search BOT 255 in hope that those other userswill be willing to and able to help him with his inquiry. In oneembodiment, expert other users who respond to such requests areautomatically given monetary or other rewards for their cooperation. Inone embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 automatically presents oneor more survey questions to the user (e.g., the GP MD) who causedlaunching of the Me-Serving Search BOT 255 and who returned to examinethe brought back contents 256. The posed survey questions may ask theuser how satisfied he is with the returned results 256 and may askfurther questions (if the user has patience for such) that will help theSTAN_(—)2 system improve its automated formulation of the Me-ServingSearch BOTS (e.g., 255).

That is not necessarily the end of process however. In one embodiment,the material 256 brought back by the Me-Serving Search BOT 255 isautomatically tested for its usefulness to other members of the TC orTCONE (216 c) from which the first user launched that BOT. It could bethat part or all of the brought back material is useful to them as well.This testing process includes passage of the brought back material 256through a buffering or filtering outer layer 216 b of the TC or TCONE(216 c), where such buffering may employ automated filters and/or votingby selected members of the corresponding TC or TCONE (216 c). If thevoting and/or filtering ranks the material (in part or in whole) asbeing useful, it is absorbed into inner or outer planetary circles(e.g., the one between 216 b and 216 c) of the TC or TCONE according toa cross-correlation score that logically positions it in ranked relationrelative to other absorbed content of the corresponding TC or TCONE (216c). (This process will be further detailed below as well.) WhileMe-Serving Search BOTS are generally instantiated and launched at theinstigation of specific users or user groups, there are other kinds ofSearch BOTS (also denoted as 255) which are automatically instantiatedand launched on behalf of a respective TC or TCONE (216 c) on a regularbasis and/or in response to various predefined triggering events (e.g.,increased user activity detected at the respective TC or TCONE). Theseother Search BOTS, which may be referred to as TC-Serving orTCONE-Serving Search BOTS can be regularly and automatically bringingback cross-pollination data (e.g., 262/264/252) to their respectivelaunch pads (a TC or TCONE) for assessment by the respective launch pads(e.g., by manual voting on and/or by automated filtering of returnedpackage material) and for possible incorporation of the returnedmaterial into the TCONE and/or its associated topic nodes (TC's) basedon the assessment. Accordingly, various ones of the TC's and/or TCONEsin topic space 215 of the STAN_(—)2 system 220/110 are beingperiodically or even constantly updated by cross-pollination materialbeing automatically brought back to those TC's and/or TCONEs bycorresponding Search BOTS (a.k.a. a species of CPAP's) and/or bycorresponding CPUP's (human agents, aided by spyware software 132 s asshall be described in conjunction with 318 of FIG. 3A).

User-launched or TCONE-launched or TC-launched Search BOTS are onespecies of CPAP's. The STAN_(—)2 system 220/110 can alternatively oradditionally utilize other types of BOT's including Lurking BOT's,User-following BOT's and Web-Crawling BOT's. Briefly, Lurking BOT's(e.g., 116 c of FIG. 1A) are assigned to hover at (to lurk at) apredefined external and content sourcing area of the Internet 101 suchas for example, inside a particular room of a role playing game such asSecondLife™, and to behave therein as a NPC (Non-Player Character) ifneed be, and to simply collect data as it comes into that lurked at areaand sift through the data looking for noteworthy indications ofemphasis. The indications of emphasis can be predefined by the STAN_(—)2system and may include, but are not limited to, meta-tagged data,XML-tagged data; bolded, underlined, italicized, in-quotes, highlighted,all-capitalized or otherwise so differentially emphasized data,hyperlinked words and phrases, and so on. The Lurking BOT (e.g., 116 c)returns such differentially emphasized data as CFi data to an automatedDomains/Topics Lookup Service (DLUX) of the STAN_(—)2 system 110 and inresponse, the STAN_(—)2 system generates signals indicating the mostprobable topic nodes (a.k.a. TC's or topic centers) to which the CFidata (the differentially emphasized data returned by the Lurking BOTe.g., 116 c) belongs. The probable topic nodes identification data(produced by the DLUX) is thereby logically linked to the lurked-atlocation (e.g., a SecondLife™ room, a website, a Podcast, a Tweet™stream, etc.) which the Lurking BOT (e.g., 116 c) was assigned to lurkat. A number of different subsequent actions can then follow. In oneembodiment, the combination of the DLUX output signals (e.g.,identifications of top T topic nodes) and the associated CFi datasignals and the signal identifying the lurked-at location (e.g.,SecondLife™ room) is automatically transmitted to automatedDomain-specific Matching Service (DsMS) of the STAN_(—)2 system and theDsMS automatically finds a matching one or more TCONEs to which itforwards the so-combined and re-package data. The receiving TCONE(s)(see 216 c of FIG. 2 as an example) then use(s) automated and/or manualfiltering means (buffer 216 b) thereof to determine what to do with theso-packaged and received combination data. In one embodiment, the TCONEcan absorb it, reject it, or redirect it to another spot (e.g., 216 n)in the topic space 215 of the STAN_(—)2 system. In one embodiment, thereceiving TCONE automatically uses the so-packaged and received data forformulating a more sophisticated TCONE-Servicing BOT (e.g., 116 a) whichthen goes out to investigate the associated data and content sourcinglocation in more detail for the purpose of bringing back more on-topiccross-pollination data (e.g., 262/264/252).

In summary, instantiated and activated Lurking BOT's (e.g., 116 c)operate as if they were a dumbed down STAN_(—)2 user who remains at onepre-assigned and content sourcing location on the Internet (e.g., asingle and periodically refreshed webpage) and keeps feeding CFi's backto the system DLUX server(s) as new and noteworthy data appears at thatassigned location. In one embodiment, associated dummy user profiles ofthe Lurking BOT (e.g., 116 c) are automatically formed as anamalgamation of user profiles of real STAN_(—)2 users, morespecifically, of STAN_(—)2 users who are known to frequent the lurked atsite under their STAN_(—)2 personas and/or under their alter egopersonas (see 184 of FIG. 1B). The associated dummy user profiles of theLurking BOT (e.g., 116 c) may be automatically varied from time to timeso as to provide some dynamic variation to the corresponding results. Astaught in the here incorporated STAN_(—)1 application, the DLUXserver(s) automatically combine the user's profiles (e.g., CpCCp andDsCCp's) when automatically determining from the received CFi's what themost likely associated topic(s) is/are.

User-following BOT's (e.g., 116 e of FIG. 1A) are another form ofinstantiated and activated BOT's and these assigned a particular one ormore STAN_(—)2 users (e.g., 131) to follow or one or more out-of-STANusers (e.g., 222 of FIG. 2) to follow (as best as such users can befollowed) while those followed users utilize out-of-STAN content sourceswhile not at the time being monitored by the STAN_(—)2 system 110. Morespecifically, the User-following BOT's (e.g., 116 e) may subscribe tovarious external platform services that allow its users (includingpermitted NPC users) to sign up for “following” and receiving alertsabout the activities of certain followed other users. In other words,certain ones of external platforms provide follower-alertingnotifications indicating new recent activities of the followedpersonalities. More specifically, in the LinkedIn™ system, registeredmembers may sign up as “followers” of the other members. Then, when the“followed” other member joins a new discussion group or launches aproposed discussion, a notification of that new event is made availableto his or her “followers”. The User-following BOT's (e.g., 116 e) of theSTAN_(—)2 system accordingly subscribe to such follow-notificationservices and periodically refresh or check in on theirfollower's-notification area in wait for the follow-notification alertsto appear regarding the being-followed users that have been assigned tothem by the STAN_(—)2 system. Since the aliases storing record 184 ofFIG. 1B provides cross-linked external user names and ID's of users ofthe associated external platforms (e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™, LinkedIn™,etc.), the STAN_(—)2 system has ready access to external platformidentifications of some users; and as will be seen below, can gatherexternal platform identifications of identifications of other usersthrough cross-pollination mechanisms actuated by the STAN_(—)2 system.

In one embodiment, the to-be followed users of the User-following BOT's(e.g., 116 e) include influential and/or famous persons or personas (seefTPP's 229 of FIG. 2). The User-following BOT's try to keep track ofwhat new discussion groups or new other content sources theirfollowed-users join and/or what older discussion groups or older contentsources their followed-users frequent and report the same as CFi databack to the system DLUX server(s) of the STAN_(—)2 system. The resultingcombination data (CFi's plus probable topics plus identification ofsource) is then forwarded to corresponding automated Domain-specificMatching Service (DsMS) of the STAN_(—)2 system and so on as is the casedescribed above for the Lurking BOT's. User-following BOT's (e.g., 116e) may also gather differentially emphasized content output by theirrespectively followed users in various discussion group sessions orother Notes Exchange sessions and report the gathered data as CFisignals back to the system DLUX server(s) of the STAN_(—)2 system, whereafter the CFi data is treated in similar fashion to the way that othersuch CFi data is treated.

In one embodiment, the results obtained from the feedback data of theUser-following BOT's (e.g., 116 e) and/or the Lurking BOT's (e.g., 116c) are processed by automated Trending Data Store services of theSTAN_(—)2 system and respective trend projections are generated for thetargets of those respective BOTS. As a result, trending projections forwatched external sites (lurked at sites) and trending projections forwatched (followed) users (including especially “influential” TPP orother users) are automatically produced by the STAN_(—)2 system 110.These generated trending projections are then automaticallycross-correlated by the STAN_(—)2 system with those of alike, watchedexternal sites (lurked at sites) and/or with those of alike, watched(followed) users to thereby generate more general trending projectionsfor groups of alike watched targets. The more general trendingprojections may then be used by STAN_(—)2 system operators to manuallymodify the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 by for example, creating specialgroupings of TC's or TCONE's. The special groupings are discussedelsewhere herein.

In one embodiment, Lurking BOT's (e.g., 116 c) are assigned (via theirmission control commands e.g., 116 d) to scan through assigned sets ofaudio PodCasts that have XML files attached thereto and to report backas CFi's, the differentially treated content of the scanned audioPodCasts as meta-tagged by their respective XML files. In oneembodiment, Lurking BOT's are assigned to scan through multi-mediapresentations (e.g., PowerPoint™ slides) and to detect differentiallytreated content therein and to report the same back as CFi signals tothe STAN_(—)2 system. The scanned through multi-media presentations mayinclude video presentations that have XML and/or other semanticproviding data logically linked to them. In one embodiment, the LurkingBOT's (e.g., 116 c) keep track of the number of Notes Exchanges (e.g.,back and forth talking points) generated by different users per unit oftime (e.g., per 5 minute interval, per hour, etc.). When the NotesExchanging rate exceeds a predetermined threshold for the watched site,the Lurking BOT automatically feeds that information back as anoteworthy CFi. In this way, the STAN_(—)2 system can detect whendiscussions (or other Notes Exchanges) are becoming “heated” at variouswatched content sourcing locations on the Internet 101 and canautomatically take further investigatory action as deemed appropriatefor the corresponding nature of the watched location.

Web-Crawling BOT's (not shown, but similar to Lurking BOT's e.g., 116 cof FIG. 1A) are also used in one embodiment of the STAN_(—)2 system.Unlike Lurking BOT's, the Web-Crawling BOT's are commanded by theirattached mission control data structures (e.g., 116 d) to randomly stepthrough randomly selected online content (if it is accessible to thepublic) and to look for differentially treated content therein and tothen report the same back as CFi signals to the STAN_(—)2 system forfurther analysis and use. The Web-Crawling BOT's may alternatively oradditionally be commanded by their attached mission control datastructures (e.g., 116 d) to use one or more search engines (e.g.,Yahoo™, Bing™, Google™) as a means of scouting out content havingdifferentially treated content provided therein and to then report thatdifferentially treated content back as CFi signals to the STAN_(—)2system for further analysis and use. In one embodiment, the feedback CFisignals of the Web-Crawling BOT's (not shown) are automaticallycross-correlated with trending projections provided by the TrendingStore services of the STAN_(—)2 system (and in particular with trendingprojections of selected influential personas e.g., TPP's 229) and whenthere is a strong cross-correlation, this information is automaticallyforwarded to STAN_(—)2 system operators for possible further action. Byway of summary, it should be noted that the watched targets of LurkingBOT's and Web-Crawling BOT's can have specially differentiated contentwhich is so identified as specially differentiated because theoriginators of that content chose to specially differentiate thatcontent by bolding it, by otherwise highlighting it, by meta-tagging it,by attaching tagged semantics to it with use of XML data and the like,and so on. The target watching Lurking BOT's and Web-Crawling BOT's arethus often relying on the originators of the watched content to flag outwhat parts of the content are noteworthy and should be relayed back asCFi data. In one embodiment, however, target watching, Lurking BOT'sand/or Web-Crawling BOT's may take periodic samplings of just randomlypicked content portions of their watched targets and relay that back tothe STAN_(—)2 system as CFi data signals. In contrast to the LurkingBOT's (e.g., 116 c), the User-following BOT's (e.g., 116 e) can bethought of as relying on the greater intelligence of their followedusers for determining what might be noteworthy information that warrantsrelaying it back to the STAN_(—)2 system as CFi data signals. Moreover,the user's profile assigned to each User-following BOT (e.g., 116 e) canbe adaptively updated on trial and error or regression algorithm basisso that it begins to more correctly model the behavior of the targeted,BOT-followed user. As a result, decisions made by the STAN_(—)2 DLUXserver(s) in response to feedback CFi's of the User-following BOT's(e.g., 116 e) can be more on target with respect to what topics thefollowed targets have in mind as they join new discussion groups, engagein heated discussions within previously joined discussion group and soon.

With presently available technology, automated BOT's cannot fully mimicthe cognitions of real people when acting alone and/or in social groups.The ultimate source for information about socially significant events onthe Internet 101 is thus the objectively determinable behaviors ofpeople when acting alone and in social groups. Later below it will beexplained (e.g., in conjunction with FIGS. 3A-3D) how real people can beenticed to function as on the ground feedback agents for the STAN_(—)2system especially when those persons (e.g., Thomas 132 u 2 of FIG. 1A)are not having their activities monitored so as to produce up- orin-loadable CFi and/or CVi signals for the STAN_(—)2 system.

Before reaching that description however, reference continues here toFIG. 2 and more generally as it regards any STAN_(—)2 user (e.g., 212)who has used his/her local data processing device(s) to navigate to agiven topic node (TC) on the STAN_(—)2 system's topic space map 215 andhas optionally gained at least watching/lurking entry into one or moreTCONEs thereat. That user (e.g., 212) can then and as a result of suchbrowsing and navigating, get hold of the (optionally periodicallyupdated) on-topic content data and/or links to on-topic content dataand/or links to other on-topic or near-topic nodes provided not onlywithin the STAN_(—)2 space 215, but also; because some TC's or TCONE's(e.g., 216 c) receive and absorb cross-pollination links (e.g., 261) toexternal on-topic discussion groups or other such external on-topiccontent sources (e.g., 226) of external platforms (e.g., 220), the usermay be able to sometimes gain access to the on-topic material within thelinked-to (261) external platform space 225. Of course, some externalplatforms only allow their own registered members (members only) toenter into and browse within their respective discussion group spaces(e.g., 225). In some cases, a first STAN_(—)2 member may gain accessinto the members-only space (e.g., 225) of an external platform byhaving another STAN_(—)2 member (e.g., 132′ shown on plane 225 asopening the access door) vouch for the first STAN_(—)2 member. In somecases, the external platform allows automated BOT's (e.g., NPC's ornon-player characters) to enter their members-only space (e.g., 225) ifthe BOT is vouched for by a trusted and already-registered member (e.g.,132′) of the external platform (e.g., 220). In one embodiment, theSTAN_(—)2 system provides an automated service whereby a first STAN_(—)2member seeking to gain otherwise blocked access to on-topic material inan external platform can send automated messages to STAN_(—)2 users whoare already-registered members (e.g., 132′) of the external platformasking them to open the door (if possible) for the first STAN_(—)2member or otherwise convey to that first STAN_(—)2 member relevant partsof on-topic material found in the external but on-topic discussion groupor other external content source (e.g., 226). Given this access throughthe STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 to both internal, and sometimes evenexternal, on-topic content, the topic space browsing user can beenriched with a wide variety of information about the topic that iscurrently of interest to him or herself. Among the rich panoply ofinformation that such a user (e.g., 212) can extract is the identity(e.g., user names) of other personas who are currently involved in thesame topic of interest (e.g., that of topic node 219 a).

In terms of a more specific example of how browsing of the STAN_(—)2topic space 215 may be useful, suppose that a given user 212 is also aregistered member of outside platform 220 and when logged into thatoutside platform 220, user 212 goes under the guise of user 222, wherethis alter ego persona 222 is a member of discussion group 224 but notof discussion group 223. There could be members of discussion group 223whose interests (but not group membership) overlap with those ofdiscussion group 224 where the overlap includes current interest in thetopic of topic node 219 a. (Just because they are interested in the“topic” of topic node 219 a does not mean that the external platformmembers all make use of the STAN_(—)2 system in the same manner thatregistered user 212 does. Accordingly, the rest of the members of groups223 and 224 of external platform 220 may not know of each other'sexistence or of their overlapping current interest in the “topic” oftopic node 219 a.

By contrast, user 212 can learn of this overlapping interest even in therealm of external platform 220 if so-called cross-pollination packages(252, 254, 256, 262, 264) have been brought into one or more TCONEs(e.g., 216 c) of the STAN_(—)2 topics space 215 and thosecross-pollination packages (e.g., 264) provide information about theidentification of the overlapping-wise interested members (e.g., 223) ofthe external platform 220. The so-called cross-pollination packages(252, . . . , 264) may be carried into the TCONEs of the STAN_(—)2topics space 215 by automated agents (251, 253, 255, 260—represented asbumble bees in FIG. 2) generated and controlled by the STAN_(—)2platform 110/210 and/or such cross-pollination packages may also bemanually brought in by unartificial (in other words, real and live)volunteer members of the STAN_(—)2 system (who are aided by software,more specifically, downloaded; or more generally, in-loaded spywareprograms like 132 s which will be detailed below).

As already mentioned above, the unartificial volunteer members of theSTAN_(—)2 system are also referred to herein as CPUP's(Cross-Pollinating Un-artificial Persona) and the automated bumble beeagents (software agents) are also referred to herein as CPAP's(Cross-Pollinating Artificial Persona). It will be easier (and in somecases necessary) to first understand how the real and live volunteermembers of the STAN_(—)2 system (the CPUP's) operate before trying tounderstand how the CPAP's (bumble bee software agents) operate.

Firstly, it should be observed that some registered members (e.g., 132of FIG. 1A) of the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 by happenstance are alsoregistered members (even if under a different user names and/orpasswords) of one or more of the external platforms. Because thesemulti-platform using users (e.g., 132) can easily gain entry into theoutside platforms (even if under a different user name and/or password;i.e., “Thomas” instead of “Tom”), such multi-platform using users (e.g.,132) can be asked to volunteer to act as Cross-Pollinating Un-artificialPersona (CPAP's) on behalf of the STAN_(—)2 system and to bring backcross-pollinating packages like 252, . . . , 264 of FIG. 2 toappropriate TCONEs of the STAN_(—)2 system.

Although FIG. 2 shows automated software agents (CPAP's) 251, 253, 255and 260 as carrying the cross-pollinating packages 252, . . . , 264, itshall soon become apparent that real person CPUP's (e.g., user 132) canalso cause delivery of the cross-pollinating packages to the STAN_(—)2system. In one embodiment, there are at least three different kinds ofcross-pollinating packages and there are at least three different kindsof CPAP's that go out in the field to find such packages and bring themback to the STAN_(—)2 hive for possible absorption and use by the hive.The Me-Serving Search BOT (255) has already been mentioned above.

However, aside from BOT's that are launched at the behest of individualusers and with mission guiding data structures 116 b containing theindividual user's search specifications, another kind of CPAP (aTCONE-Serving Search BOT, also identified at 255) is automatically andperiodically launched from a respective TCONE (or automatically launchedin response to a predetermined triggering event) with a mission guidingdata structures (116 b) containing machine-inferred desires of the TCONEmembership. Background control and tracking programs within theSTAN_(—)2 system (a.k.a. SS2) may be continuously executing and scouringthe topic space 215 for TCONEs that are most active, most popular,fastest changing (e.g., drifting) and so on. The background control andtracking programs (not explicitly shown, but understood to beinstantiated across the fabric of the STAN_(—)2 system 110; i.e.distributed through its cloud is SS2 110 is implemented as a cloudcomputing system) compare a pre-recorded previous top N (e.g., N=2, 3,5, 10) topic-defining encodings (e.g., keyword, URL's) of theinvestigated TCONE against the current top N topic-defining encodingsand uses a predefined scoring algorithm to assign a score to the amountof change (it could be 0). If there is a change score exceeding apredefined threshold, the current top N topic-defining encodings (or asubset thereof) are automatically loaded into a newly created missionguiding data structure (i.e. 116 b) of a BOT and the BOT isautomatically launched into promising external platform areas (e.g.,225) in search of external content that well cross correlates with thein-loaded current top N topic-defining encodings (or a subset thereof).Topic defining and/or on-topic content found at the external searchareas is returned as a proposed cross-pollination (CP) data package(256) to the BOT launching TCONE (e.g., 216 c). Contents of thepresented CP data package (e.g., 256) are then processed by bufferinglauncher 216 b. All or part of the presented CP data package may berejected (254) or accepted on a ranked basis (voted on as being more orless currently on-topic) and thereafter absorbed into respective rankedinner and outer circles inside the TCONE. The more inner circles aredeemed closer to the TCONE core 216 c while the outer ones are, in termsof cross-correlation with core attributes of the core 216 c, deemed tobe less tightly cross-correlated to the core. Logical (virtual)positioning of absorbed material on the inner through outer circlesindicates where in the cross-correlation spectrum they belong. Just atTCONEs can “drift” over time from one TC to another, absorbed topicdefining and/or on-topic content within a given TCONE can drift from theinner planetary orbits (circles) to the outer ones, or vise versa as thenature of the TCONE changes over time. In one embodiment, aside fromblanket rejecting the presented cross-pollination data (e.g., 254) orvoting to accept it on a ranked basis, vote-eligible members of the TCor TCONE (216 c) or an automated voting mechanism that emulates theirbehavior are/is given an option of voting to “Reject-But”, where the“-But” part is that of indicating that while this rejected material isnot currently on-topic for the launcher TC or TCONE (216 c), and thus agenetic failure as regards the launcher TC or TCONE, some or all of therejected material 254 a should be nonetheless treated as a successfulgenetic mutation (successful by happenstance) and used to automaticallycreate a new topic node 216 n in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 if such adifferent topic node 216 n is not already present. If enough“Reject-But” votes/indications above a predefined threshold are cast forreturning BOTS 253 bringing such “Reject-But” material 254 a, thereturning BOTS 253 a and their corresponding “Reject-But” material 254 aare automatically re-directed to the topic space area of the new topicnode 216 n and the Reject-But” material 254 a is used to build the newtopic node 216 n while the genetically successful mission guiding datastructures (i.e. 116 b) of the re-directed BOTS (253 a) are used asinitial templates for re-birthing TC or TCONE-serving BOTS (also denotedas 255) form that new TC or TCONE (216 n). In this way, when an emergingnew topic begins to show up in the out-of-STAN domain (e.g., 220) andthere is not yet a corresponding topic node in topic space 215 for thatemerging new topic, the returning BOTS 253 bringing such “Reject-But”material 254 a back are automatically diverted to the task of buildingthe corresponding new topic node 216 n in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215and their reborn progeny (explained in FIG. 4C) are re-aimed to the taskof servicing the new topic node 216 n with cross-pollination data (e.g.,254) fetched from out-of-STAN sources (e.g., 120, 141, 144, . . . , 160,etc.).

Another type of search BOT, namely, the above-mentioned TC-ServingSearch BOT (also identified at 255) is automatically and periodicallylaunched from a respective TC (or automatically launched in response toa predetermined triggering event related to that topic center) with amission guiding data structures (116 b) containing machine-inferreddesires of the current TC membership. Since the TCONE-Serving Search BOThas been described above, it is not necessary to repeat substantiallythe same explanation for the TC-Serving Search BOT. The latter servesthe needs of the whole of the topic center (TC) rather than the inferredneeds of an individual topic center owned note exchange (TCONE). Per theteachings already provided in the here incorporated STAN_(—)1application (see giF. 4B and giF. 3C thereof), In one embodiment of theSTAN_(—)2 system, substantially all nodes in the hierarchical topicstree have a basic same structure. In other words, essentially everydomain node (and even the root node) can have the same internal datastructure as its child nodes and essentially every child node can havethe same internal data structure as its grandchild nodes, and so onuntil the leaf nodes are encountered. Leaf nodes point to the specificon-topic content (e.g., the TCONEs) of their respective specific topics.The hierarchical tree nature of the STAN_(—)2 topics space 215 means(for that embodiment, other variations are possible) that the topicspace 215 has a fractal organization as is hinted at by multi-coneslayer 216 f drawn within FIG. 2. Accordingly, not only can each lowestlevel topic node (e.g., a leaf TC) have TC-Serving Search BOTSautomatically launched on its behalf by the background control andtracking programs (not explicitly shown), but also parent topic nodesand grandparent topic nodes and so on can also have similar such SearchBOTS automatically formulated and launched to crawl the Internet 101 orspecified areas thereof on behalf of the topic nodes of origin. Eachtopic node can have its own filter and vote buffer layer similar to 216b of the exemplary TCONE 216 c and each topic node can have its owninner and outer placement circles for node-absorbed content similar tothe cross-correlation orbits described for exemplary TCONE 216 c.

It is to be noted that although at times the present disclosuredescribes a given TCONE as being hooped around or stacked over acorresponding TC or Z-pole see 219 a of FIG. 2) that does not mean thatall TCONEs are limited to being “owned” by only a single topic node(a.k.a. TC). It is fully within the contemplation of the presentdisclosure that one or more TCONEs can be simultaneously “owned” by(e.g., tethered to) two or more TC's. In one embodiment, the degree ofownership exercised by each TC to which a TCONE is tethered or moored isweighted in accordance with tether weighting factor signals stored inthe DB 119 for and logically linked to the multi-owned TCONE. A givenTCONE can for example “drift” back and forth from being more owned byone TC and later more owned by another. When various actions aredescribed herein as being taken on behalf of a TCONE and with regard toits owning parent or grandparent node, it is to be understood that theowning parent or grandparent node may be deemed, in one embodiment, tobe the majority stake holder who thereby controls on a winner takes allbasis, or in an alternate embodiment, the described action operates on apro-rata apportionment basis; where for example, overview topicdefinitions for a multi-owned TCONE are automatically derived as being atop 60% of such definitions (e.g., keywords) taken from a respective 60%owning TC, as being a top 30% of such definitions taken from arespective 30% co-owning TC, and as being a top 10% of such definitionstaken from a respective 10% co-owning TC.

It is to be additionally noted that; while the automated formulation ofTCONE-Serving Search BOTS and TC (topic node)-Serving Search BOTS hasbeen described above as serving individual TCONEs and individual topicnodes found within the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215, it is within thecontemplation of the present disclosure to allow for operator defined“groupings” of specific TCONEs and/or specific topic nodes to berecorded and stored as such in the DB 119 of the system 110/210. It iswithin the contemplation of the present disclosure that the abovedescribed background control and tracking programs (not explicitlyshown) will also service these operator formed groupings and thatgrouping nodes, similar in structure of data to that of topic nodes willbe recorded and stored as such in the DB 119 of the system 110/210. Inone embodiment, premium subscription members of the STAN_(—)2 system aregranted browsing access to specific ones or more of the speciallyformulated grouping nodes. (Normal topic nodes and their encompassedTCONEs are automatically formed and logically linked by actions of theSTAN_(—)2 user population. However, that user population may nonethelessfail to recognize special or eclectic connections as between disparateTCONEs and/or as between disparate TC's. The STAN_(—)2 system operatorsmay instead isolate those unrecognized eclectic connections; i.e. asbetween a TC dedicated to “economics” for example and another TCdedicated to “computer science and The Mythical Man Month” for exampleand formulate groupings for such apparently disparate topic nodes and/orapparently disparate TCONE's.

In one embodiment, individual users are enabled to formulate and savetheir own “groupings” of favorite TC's and/or TCONEs. One of thesefavorites “groupings” can be stored as the user's STAN_(—)2 Home page.When the user opens up this STAN_(—)2 Home page, he sees a topic spacemap (like 215) but showing the local neighborhoods of only his specifiedfavorite TC's and/or TCONEs. He can observe if a new TC or TCONE hasrecently moved into the local neighborhood of one of his “favorites” andhe can browse the new TC or TCONE (assuming it allows general browsingor participating entry—if it does not, it may not even show up on theuser's Home page). Alternatively or additionally, the user may quicklyjump in from his Home page into (for browsing purposes) one of hisspecified favorite TC's and/or TCONEs. A user may of course have morethan one such Home page and the STAN_(—)2 system may automatically pickthe appropriate Home page and display it upon log-in based on thedetected mood, environment, etc., that the logging-in user is detectedto be in.

Another kind of “personal grouping” which the user can specify is hishistory grouping of recently used TC's or TCONE's, where the user canspecify the storage depth (how many TC's and/or TCONE's) and whether itshould be TC's alone, TCONE's alone or both.

Yet another kind of “personal grouping” which the user can specify ishis filtered history grouping of recent and, for example, heavilyfocused upon TC's or TCONE's, where the user can again specify thestorage depth (how many TC's and/or TCONE's), whether it should be TC'salone, TCONE's alone or both, and what the filtering parameters are tobe applied by the automated filtering mechanism (e.g., how intense of afocusing upon qualifies as above threshold and/or what other filteringcriteria are to be applied.) In one embodiment, when the user firstactivates STAN_(—)2 operations in his local data processing device(e.g., hand held computer/phone), rather than immediately going intomonitoring mode and feeding back content source recommendations (e.g.,chat opportunities) based on currently up- or in-loaded CFi's, theSTAN_(—)2 operations first feed the user with recommendations based onat least one of his Home Page TC's and/or TCONE's, his unfilteredhistory of TC's and/or TCONE's and a user-selected one of his filteredhistory of TC's and/or TCONE's. In one embodiment, if active interestmonitoring (see 312 of FIG. 3A) is turned off by the user, the STAN_(—)2operations automatically revert to the boot-up mode of displayingcontent source recommendations based on his Home, unfiltered history orselected filtered history of TC's and/or TCONE's. Only if the usercompletely shuts off the banner mechanism (315) by clicking on thebanner close tool (315 xx in FIG. 3A) does the STAN_(—)2 recommendationssupplying mechanism shut off in such an embodiment.

Having describe several different types of Service-providing BOT'sabove, it is worthwhile to here note some of the different types ofpackaged content that such BOTS (e.g., 260, 251, 255, 116 a, 116 c) maybring back to the hive upon their return from a search and retrievemission (one defined by the attached mission guiding data structure(i.e. 116 b, 116 d). Bubble 264 represents a first of the possibledifferent types of cross-pollinating packages and, as can be seen inFIG. 2, this first package type (264, and with help of itspayload-carrying CPAP or BOT or in some cases a CPUP) conveysidentification information from external platforms such as a user'sexternal user name and external password (optional), and such as anexternal Group Discussion name and/or ID number and/or ID of discussionthread from an external platform. In one embodiment, each conveyed ID(in the type 1 package 264) that is used in an external platform hasattached to it an indication of where it came from (e.g., from whichspecific external platform (e.g., FaceBook™, MySpace™, LinkedIn™, etc.)if not also from which specific discussion group or which specificdiscussion thread or other subarea of the external platform it wasobtained. In the above-described FIG. 1B, it was already explained how auser (e.g., 132) can convey his own external user name and externalpassword (optional) from one or more external platforms (e.g., 120/220)into the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210. And it has also been alreadydescribed above with reference to FIG. 1B how the STAN_(—)2 system canthen automatically import the external user names (but not passwords) ofhis friends, buddies, email contacts and so forth if user 132 givespermission for such automated importation of external user ID's. When soimporting external user names, one embodiment also attaches to eachimported external ID an indication of where it came from so as tothereby inform any software program, or other entity looking at it, asto what specific external platform the imported ID applies if also notinforming as to what specific members group and so on.

By using a slightly different procedure than 170 of FIG. 1B, the sameuser (e.g., 132) can be asked to manually convey or to let the STAN_(—)2system automatically import the names and/or other identifications(e.g., group numbers) of external platform groups that the user haslisted in his external user's account(s) or external profiles orexternal service providing resources (e.g., MS Outlook™, CRM (CustomerRelationship Management) databases, etc.). The conveyance of suchinformation into the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 helps to expand theuser-to-user associations (U2U) which the STAN_(—)2 system can thenautomatically make as between a STAN_(—)2-monitored first user and hisexternal friend names and/or external favorite group names. Then, inFIG. 3A, when that STAN_(—)2-monitored user (e.g., 132) has hismonitoring function turned ON (see box 312 of FIG. 3A), the STAN_(—)2system can not only automatically make on-topic content recommendationsin upper scrollable banner 315 (e.g., recommended chat rooms to joininto based on current CFi's), but the STAN_(—)2 system can alsoautomatically inform the user (132) of how many and/or which of hisexternal friends, buddies, contacts, CRM-clients or customers, etc. arealready joined into and/or have been co-invited to join into therecommended chat opportunities. Color coding may be used todifferentiate between already inside versus co-invited to join friends.More specifically, under chat room recommendation 315 b (for identifiedtopic A2), the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 has also downloaded (orin-loaded) to the user's computer (or up-in the cloud virtualinstantiation thereof), information indicating that two (2) of theuser's FaceBook™ friends are already inside that chat room, or have beensimilarly invited to enter that chat room, where one or both suchindications (invited versus entered) appear in subscripting info-plate315 b 1. By right clicking on plate 315 b 1, the user may learn of theexternal user names of those friends and their status relative to theroom (e.g., have they already entered and started participating or arethey merely in the invited but not yet joined mode?). Similarly for nextchat room recommendation 315 c (for identified topic C3), the STAN_(—)2system 110/210 has also downloaded to the user's local display screen300, information indicating that three (3) of the user's LinkedIn™contacts are already inside that chat room and that one (1) of them is amember of the Discussion Group number 7 to which he happens to belong.The latter information appears in subscripting info-plate 315 c 1. Byright clicking on plate 315 c 1, the user may learn of the external usernames of those LinkedIn™ contacts and/or of the external names of thoseLinkedIn™ discussion group(s) if they are already not yet listed onplate 315 c 1. In the same or an alternate embodiment, similar and/oradditional information of this nature may be provided when the userhovers his mouse cursor icon (e.g., 335) over the chat roomrecommendation (e.g., 315 c) and/or right clicks over the contentrecommendation (e.g., 315 c).

When a user's encodings (e.g., focused upon keywords, tags, URL's,facial expressions etc.) are being actively monitored by the STAN_(—)2system, where for example such active monitoring is continuouslyindicated to the user by a blinking indicator or the like (andoptionally where rate of blink indicates rate of CFi's or CVi's beingthen up- or in-loaded), the data being thus provided by the user'smonitored activities to the STAN_(—)2 system can providecross-pollination data to the STAN_(—)2 system if, for example, the useris visiting an external content source (e.g., he is playing a new Zynga™role-playing game, i.e. like FarmVille™) that has not been previouslyrecorded as being logically linked to a current topic that the STAN_(—)2system deems to be on the user's mind. In that case, depending on how‘influential’ the given user is deemed to be to the current topic nodeand/or depending on how many other users have similarly begun to focuson the same or a similar new content source, the STAN_(—)2 system mayautomatically and responsively link an identification (e.g., URL) of thenew content source and/or an abstract derived from that source to thecurrent topic node (or Notes Exchange session, a.k.a. TCONE) that isdeemed to be currently associated with the most probable topic(s) theuser has in mind and thus incorporation of new, cross-pollinatingcontent takes place even without the user's conscious awareness of it.However, sometimes the user decides to turn the STAN_(—)2 activemonitoring OFF (see 312′ of FIG. 3B) and/or forgets to turn it on (see312 of FIG. 3A), in which case when the user comes upon potentiallyrelevant and new cross-pollinating content, the STAN_(—)2 system willnot be able to acquire it through the active monitoring and backgroundintake process.

Still referring to FIG. 3A, it will now be explained how anow-still-being-monitored STAN_(—)2 user (e.g., 132) can be asked tovolunteer (318 a) to bring back to the STAN_(—)2 system even from hisSTAN_(—)2 un-monitored activities, yet more information (beyond hisexternal aliases of record 184), which this time can include those ofcross-pollination package type 2 (associated keywords, tags, meta-tags,MetaWeb™ entity identifiers**, etc.) of bubble 262 where the latter canalso be conveyed by the illustrated CPAP 260 or by a STAN-REP with helpof in-loaded spyware (132 s—to be described below). (**Explanation:MetaWeb™ entity identifiers incidentally are meta-tag like buriedidentifiers that may be used in place of or in addition to keywordswhere such MetaWeb™ entity identifiers act to remove some of theambiguity that may otherwise be present in keywords with multiplemeanings. It is to be noted that mere removing some of the ambiguitythat may otherwise be present in a keyword may not of itself reveal thespecific topic that a user is most likely to be subjectively andintently thinking about.)

But before explaining the popped-out Please-Volunteer pane 318, oneadditional mechanism, 315 ss of the STAN_(—)2 user interface will bedescribed. Mechanism 315 ss of FIG. 3A represents an opaque oroptionally translucent and thus “shadow”-like pull down window shade(a.k.a. ‘shadow shade’) that may be unscrolled and rescrolled at theuser's behest. Various mouse gestures and/or finger gestures (on touchpad or touch screen) may be pre-programmed to initiate the window shadeunscrolling (partial or over entire display, whole unscrolling) andrescrolling (partial or whole) operations of mechanism 315 ss. Ofcourse, pre-programmed hot keys or pop out menus may also be used.Although not shown (due to space limitations in the drawing area of FIG.3A), when the full unscroll in shadow mode operation of mechanism 315 ssis instigated by user action (and sometimes automatically by a userpermitted script), the display is operated to give the impression that atranslucent screen is being pulled down over the original screen areathe user is viewing. This translucent screen (not shown, and whosedegree of translucency can be controlled by the user) has on ittranslucent images of the chat opportunities (e.g., 315 b) and/or ofother content source recommendations (e.g., 315 a) being then providedby the STAN_(—)2 system. However, unlike the case of the partial opaqueunscroll mode shown in FIG. 3A, when full unscroll in shadow mode isactuated, each displayed chat opportunity (e.g., 315 b) and/or of othercontent source recommendation representing glyph (e.g., 315 d) moves totranslucently overlie the on-main-screen content (e.g., pane 317) towhich that translucent recommendation glyph most closely associateswith. More specifically, chat opportunities glyphs related to generalTopic ‘A’ (such as glyphs 315 a and 315 b for example) will appear tofloat translucently over content pane 317 (also logically linked togeneral Topic ‘A’). Similarly, chat opportunity representing glyph 315 d(and its associated gadgets if those are being displayed) will appear tofloat translucently over content pane 330 a which; like glyph 315 d, ismost logically linked to general Topic ‘D’ (and more specifically, tosub-topic D2). A variety of user input actions may be pre-programmed toindicate that they apply to either the main screen or the pulledthereover translucent shadow screen. Accordingly, a user may not need tomove his finger, stylus, or other pointing/actuating device far awayfrom an item (e.g., 330 a) on the main screen in order to activate andoperate on a corresponding shadow screen item (e.g., TC flag 315 e) fordrag-and-drop operation (e.g., 336 e described elsewhere herein) oropening or other activity. In one embodiment, when the scrollablerecommendations showing mechanism 315 ss is fully scrolled up (andoptionally minimized with tool 315 mm), the blink rate monitoringwarning area 312 and/or sliding volume and importance scales (not shown)optionally provided thereon let the user know what volume and/or rate ofincoming recommendations he is not seeing due to the scrolled up (orminimized) state of showing mechanism 315 ss and what min/max and/oraverage importance ratings (e.g., temperature) of the currentrecommendations are.

As mentioned elsewhere herein, in one embodiment, just because CFi-basedmonitoring (312) is turned off, that does not mean that the STAN_(—)2automatic recommendations function is turned off. In one embodiment, aslong as the user does not click on the close-banner-function tool 315xx, the illustrated one banner 315 continues to supply content sourcerecommendations; except that in this case the recommendations in thatbanner 315 are based on at least one of the user's Home Page of TC'sand/or TCONEs, his recent History Page of TC's and/or TCONEs, or anotherfiltered subset of T′ TC's and/or TCONEs where T′ is set by the user toan appropriate value such as his Top 3 or Top 5 favorites and thefiltering function is also programmably established by the user to, forexample, provide his Top T′ of most heavily focused upon TC's or his TopT′ of most heavily participated in TCONE's.

Although FIG. 3A shows only one un- and re-scrollable banner 315 at thetop of the screen 300, in one embodiment, a user may alter the STAN_(—)2operation settings of his local data processing device (e.g., 131 a) soas to have multiple recommendations-providing banners like 315 runningat the same time, for example all in minimized mode (in a bottom screentray area 315 tt in the form of minimized recommendations-providingbanners such as Bannr2 and Bannr3 for example). Eachrecommendations-providing banner (e.g., Bannr1-Bannr3) can have itsrecommendations driven on a different basis. More specifically, if inFIG. 3A and for one embodiment the user hovers his cursor (335) over thequestion-mark tool (adjacent to banner-minimizing tool 315 mm), theuser's data processing device (e.g., 131 a) automatically responds byshowing what the driving basis of that banner (e.g., displayed topbanner Bannr1 315) is, where in the illustrated example, thehover-provided indication 315 hh shows that Bannr1 (a.k.a. 315) iscurrently being primarily driven on the basis of the user's currentCFi's. However, if the user had hovered over minimized and in-tray (in315 tt) Bannr2, the corresponding hover-provided indication (not shown)might have shown that the latter recommendations-providing banner(Bannr2) is being primarily driven on the basis of the user's specifiedHome Page TC's and/or TCONE's. If the user had instead hovered overminimized and in-tray (in 315 tt) Bannr3, the correspondinghover-provided indication (not shown) might have shown that the latterrecommendations-providing banner (Bannr3) is being primarily driven onthe basis of the user's specified, recently heavily focused upon historygrouping of TC's and/or TCONE's. Any one or more of the minimized andin-tray (in 315 tt) banners may be de-minimized and moved to auser-picked location on screen. For example, the user may elect to stacka plurality of de-minimized and recommendations-providing banners (e.g.,Bannr1-Bannr3) one just below or even slightly overlapping the next. Theuser may elect to differently color code his different banners so thathe can easily tell them apart.

In one embodiment, the user may design and store arecommendations-providing banners defining page (not shown) where thelatter displays a grid of minimized banner boxes like those of tray 315tt, each with its own unique color perhaps and each with its own uniquename if desired. The user may right click on selected ones of theseminimized banner boxes and choose an Add-Now to main screen functionwhere upon the selected banner will be activated into itsrecommendations-providing mode and appended to tray 315 tt. Anotherchooseable selection that the user has shown to him when right clickingon a banner box in his stored recommendations-providing banners definingpage (not shown) is Change Auto-Trigger and Other Settings.

The latter, optional function can be user activated so that differentrecommendations-providing banners become activated or de-activated inautomatic response to different triggering events, such as for example,detected time and place. More specifically, assume the user (e.g., Tom)has certain daily habits. When he gets up in the morning at home, helikes to read (or view) the latest news and gossip about his favoritesports teams. Later, when he gets to the office and has his second cupof morning coffee, he likes to read (or view) the latest news and gossipabout his favorite financial topics and his favorite world politicstopics. Then in the afternoon he likes to catch up on the latest newsand gossip concerning his career. In one embodiment, that user (e.g.,Tom) can pre-establish and store different personal groupings of hisfavorite TC's and/or TCONE's, for example a first whose correspondingcontent source recommendations will automatically cause a correspondingand activated recommendations-providing banner (e.g., Bannr2) to displayrecommendations regarding the latest news and gossip about his favoritesports teams. The user can program the banner box that is driven on thebasis of this first personal grouping to be automatically activated(triggered on) in response to machine system detection that he is athome (e.g., based on GPS readings) and it is morning and it is aweekday; but to shut down (become de-activated) by 12 noon. Continuingwith the example, the user (e.g., Tom) can pre-establish and store asecond personal groupings of his favorite TC's and/or TCONE's so thatthe latter will cause the corresponding and activatedrecommendations-providing banner (e.g., Bannr3) to displayrecommendations regarding the latest news and gossip about his favoritefinancial topics and his favorite world politics topics. The user canprogram the banner box that is driven on the basis of this secondpersonal grouping to be automatically activated (triggered on) inresponse to machine system detection that he is at the office (e.g.,based on GPS readings) and it is morning and it is a weekday; but toshut down (become de-activated) by 3:00 PM. A third personal groupingsof his favorite TC's and/or TCONE's and activation criteria for thebanner box driven by it can be similarly formulated and stored so as tomeet his personal desires for seeing career related news after lunch andso on.

When it is explained above that the displayed recommendations ofillustrated Bannr1 (a.k.a. 315) are being primarily “driven” bycurrently uploading (or in-loading) CFi's; as is indicated by theillustrated hover-over response 315 hh of FIG. 3A, it is to beunderstood that current user CFi's are being fed to one or more DLUXservers (not shown) of the STAN_(—)2 system and the DLUX servers arethen responsively generating signals indicating the probable topic nodeswhose topics are probably the ones on the mind of the monitored user.Thereafter, the STAN_(—)2 automated DsMS sub-systems (the automatedDomain-specific Matching Services) are converting theprobable-topic-of-interest signals received from the DLUX('s) intocorresponding content source recommendation signals (e.g., chatopportunity indicating signals) which are then ranked and the top rankedones are displayed horizontally across illustrated banner 315 at a userpre-selected recommendations presenting rate. The term, “primarily” asused in conjunction with how a banner is being driven is to beunderstood as indicating that there could be other, secondary drivemechanisms, for example, an occasional “surprise me” recommendation maybe displayed even though the uploaded CFi's did not directly cause thesame to be generated.

On the other hand, when another displayed banner (say Bannr2) is saidherein to being in a mode where it is primarily driven on the basis ofthe user's specified Home Page TC's and/or TCONE's, then generallyspeaking there will be no need to use the STAN_(—)2 DLUX's (theautomated Domains/Topics Lookup Services inside 110) because at leastthe broader topics of current interest will have already beenpre-specified in the user's Home Page of favorite TC's and/or TCONE's bythe favorite TC's recorded therein. Moreover in the case where it is afavorite TCONE that is pre-specified in the user's Home Page offavorites, there may also be no need to use the STAN_(—)2 automated DsMSsub-systems (the automated Domain-specific Matching Services) because aco-compatible chat opportunity or alike content source (if it stillexists—some chat rooms can close and disappear) will have already beenpicked out and specified. However the relative rankings of the Home PageTC's and/or TCONE's (assuming those TCONE's have not closed or driftedfar away) is still a variable to be played with because the user mayprefer to rank some topic centers (TC's) as being more favored thanothers within his Home Page and some TCONE's as being more favored thanothers recorded within his Home Page. To this end, in one embodiment ofthe STAN_(—)2 system, the user is given the option of logicallyattaching different preference weights to the respective TC's and/orTCONE's recorded within his Home Page. Then, as between the various TC'srecorded within his Home Page, the more heavily weighted and thus moreheavily preferred will be submitted to the STAN_(—)2 automated DsMSsub-systems more frequently (at least on average even if not soconsistently) than the less heavily weighted and thus relatively lesspreferred; and as a result, recommendations (e.g., 315 b, 315 c) basedon the user's more heavily preferred TC's will on average tend to appearmore often on the user's, Home-Page driven banner (e.g., Bannr2; shownas minimized in tray 315 tt) and content source recommendations based onthe user's less preferred TC's will on average tend to appear lessoften.

In one embodiment, even where the user has recorded specific TC's in hisHome Page as being the preferred TC's of interest, when the Home Pagedriven banner (e.g., Bannr2) is active, the STAN_(—)2 system nonethelessautomatically submits the identified favorite TC's of the user's HomePage to its DLUX's (the automated Domains/Topics Lookup Services inside110) with a request that the DLUX's lookup other TC's with substantiallysimilar topics. The submission of the user's current Home Page favoriteTC to the DLUX's may be accompanied with, and logically linked to, asubmission to the DLUX's of the user's recorded, recent topics ofinterest (rTOI's). The rTOI's may be used by the DLUX's to betterdetermine what other TC's are closest in topic space 215 to the user'sHome Page favorite based on the user's recent history. Typically, auser's interests do not jump discontinuously from one topic to acompletely new topic overnight. Instead they tend to evolve over timeand have some continuance from recent topics of interest (rTOI's).Accordingly the DLUX's may use the user's rTOI's in combination with theuser's Home Page identification of what is his Home Page favorite TC('s)to better identify what other TC's in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 aremore likely than not to be of further interest to that same user.

When the DLUX's of the STAN_(—)2 system lookup the additional TC's thatare probably interrelated to the user's Home Page favorite TC('s), inone embodiment, the DLUX's take into account a recent recorded historyof the so-called captains and mutineers of the Home Page listed TC assuch compares to the date when the user's Home Page favorite TC('s) wererecorded as such in his Home Page. Recall that most TC's (except thefixed reference point ones) can drift over time just as TCONE's candrift over time in the usually changing STAN_(—)2 topic space 215.Accordingly, the TC that the user recorded as being his favorite a monthago may no longer be the same positioned TC because during the month itdrifted to a new position in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215. The DLUX'smay conclude, based on when this user last visited the Home Pageidentified TC, that the user intends to navigate to a topic spaceposition corresponding to where his listed TC was a month ago, when theold captains of the TC were in charge as opposed to a new topic spaceposition that the Home Page identified TC has drifted to ever since themutineers took command two weeks ago. In one embodiment, rather thanoffering just content sources (e.g., chat opportunities) derived fromhis Home Page identified TC (when Bannr2 is activated), the STAN_(—)2system also automatically offers as recommended alternative contentsources, those derived from TC's that remained in the original topicspace vicinity of the Home Page identified TC (e.g., a month ago) beforeit drifted. When the user preferentially picks one choice over theother, the STAN_(—)2 system can use this as an adaptive learningexperience (e.g., using neural net adaptive technology for example) toknow for the next time what content source recommendations to offer moreaggressively when the Home Page identified TC drifts yet again (e.g., inone month in the future).

Similar to the way that Home Page identified TC's are managed, if theuser chooses to differently weigh his favorite TCONE's (if any) recordedon his Home Page of favorite TC's and/or TCONE's with one particularskew or another, the recommendations displaying sub-system (not shown)will automatically favor the making of the more heavily weighted TCONE'sover the less weighted ones. In one embodiment, however, a fair chancemechanism is incorporated into the automated ranking and selectingmechanism of the recommendations displaying sub-system (not shown) andoperated such that even the lowest weighted of the favorite TCONE's onthe Home Page shows up (e.g., drops into a displayed newspaper-likecolumn) on Bannr2 with a frequency corresponding to its relative weightas compared to the weights of the more heavily weighted TCONE's recordedwithin the user's Home Page. The deemed hottest recommendations willremain displayed on the banner (e.g., Bannr2) and thus if and when it isgiven such a fair-chance, a recommendation for the lowest weighted ofthe favorite TCONE's rises up from under the least hot of the alreadydisplayed recommendations. A similar, fair chance mechanism isincorporated into the automated TC submitting mechanism thatautomatically submits the user's favorite TC's of his Home Page to theSTAN_(—)2 automated DsMS sub-systems so that over the long haul, theDsMS will provide content source recommendations for display on Bannr2where those recommendations are derived from the user's least weighted,but nonetheless favorite, TC on a frequency basis corresponding to itsrelative weight as compared to the weights of the more heavily weightedTC's recorded within the user's Home Page.

Also similar to the way that the possibility of drift by the Home Pageidentified TC's is managed, one embodiment of the STAN_(—)2 systemautomatically submits the Home Page identified TCONE's to the DsMSservices with a request that the latter automated Domain-specificMatching Services nonetheless locate other TCONE's similar to the HomePage identified TCONE's. This is done for at least two reasons. Firstly,a Home Page identified TCONE that was recorded into the Home Page say amonth or two ago may have drifted significantly in topic space 215 sincenew captains took over. Secondly, the Home Page identified TCONE of saytwo months ago may no longer exist or its participants may haveabandoned it and it now floats as a ghost ship in the STAN_(—)2 topicspace 215. What the user is typically desirous of is a now active TCONEthat substantially matches what the old TCONE used to be. Accordinglythe STAN_(—)2 system automatically gives the user a choice as betweenthe old TCONE and one or more fresher TCONE's that substantially matchthe attributes of the old TCONE (the one recorded in the user's HomePage) but are more recently active with users and also more conform tothe user's recorded recent history of the topics of interest (rTOI's).Additionally, since the DsMS services tend to provide recommendationsthat are more in tune with the user's current mood and currentlyactivated profiles, content source recommendations provided through useof the DsMS services will tend to be more in tune with what the userwants now (e.g., a TCONE with a hot debate raging therein) as opposed towhat the user may have wanted a month or two ago when the Home Pageidentified TCONE was recorded in that Home Page.

In one embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system also provides an automated,“surprise me” function wherein, rather than using the assigned andrecorded weights of the favorite TC's and/or TCONE's on the user's HomePage (or less drifted away equivalents thereof), the system randomlypicks out TC's from the Home Page to periodically forward to the DsMSservices and/or randomly picks out TCONE's from the Home Page toperiodically forward to the recommendations displaying sub-system (notshown) that populates the corresponding banner (e.g., Bannr2, Bannr3,etc.) with scrolled-in (e.g., scrolled-down into newspaper-like columns)recommendations at a user-selected or automatically-selectedrecommendations making rate. The automatically-selected recommendationsmaking rate may be based on various importance ranking algorithmswherein the user's known preferences for certain influential other users(e.g., TPP's) and/or known preferences for certain topics causes thescrolling (e.g., replacement) rate to decrease when the associated“temperature” or heat rises; this typically indicating that discussionsover a certain favorite topic of the user's are heating up and the userwill probably want to have that recommendation kept in view. At the sametime, temperature gauge (not shown) in region 312 might show theincreased “hotness” thereby alerting the user to what is going on.

In summary, a user can program any one or more of his locally-used dataprocessing devices (132 a, 132 b, etc.), if their available resources sopermit, to operate in automatically triggered multi-banner mode and oneof those banners (e.g., Bannr2) may be feeding recommendations primarilybased on the user's Home Page of favorites while another of thosebanners (e.g., Bannr3) may be feeding recommendations primarily based onanother pre-weighted grouping of TC's and/or TCONE's specified by theuser or even by STAN_(—)2 operators if the user elects to use one of theeditor's choices groupings to drive one of his activated banners. Insuch cases, the one or more recommendations-providing banners (e.g.,315, Bannr2, Bannr3) that unfurl on the user's screen (300) will appearas if they are like personalized television-channel-guide scrolls thatare custom made for him, with the scrolling-in recommendations madewithin each banner offering him more detailed and on-respective-topic(s)content as well as in-tune with mood and surroundings content (e.g.,with each news-paper column like and scrolled down new recommendationbeing like a content supplying channel in its own respects) for him topop open and probe deeper into if he so chooses. These personalizedtelevision channel guide-like banners will appear to intelligentlychange according to time and the place he happens to be at (as well asperhaps his current mood) thanks to the automated place and time bannertriggering mechanisms as well as mood and past history detectingmechanisms. Stated otherwise, in one embodiment, the user may programcertain ones of the multiple banners to be automatically activated andde-activated based on his mood changes as detected by his up- orin-loaded CFi's as well as being based on time, place and/or othertriggering encodings. Of course, display of the STAN_(—)2-recommendedchat opportunities and/or other content sources need not be in the formof scrolling marquee-style banners like 315. The recommendations could,for example, pop up one at time at a rate of one changed recommendationevery 30 seconds in a Picture-Picture (PiP) grid that has, say 4 squaresand each square is dedicated to a respective and currently activated,drive basis means (e.g., one being the user's currently uploaded CFi's,the second being user CFi's uploaded 4 hours ago, the third being TC'sand/or TCONE's of his Home Page and the fourth being another personalgroupings of his favorite TC's and/or TCONE's).

Now finally referring to the Please-Volunteer pane 318 of FIG. 3A,assume that while an in-STAN user (e.g., Tom 132 u 1) is doing researchonline on a given topic of interest to him (let it be called topic ‘A’),where the research is conducted under the auspices of an externalcontent provider (in this case FaceBook™ as is indicated in open window317), the user (Tom) has his STAN_(—)2 monitoring function turned ON. Inone embodiment, the state of that active monitoring is displayed to himby status box 312 (optionally blinking and/or optionally having rate andimportance gauges (not shown) included therein). Assume the STAN_(—)2system has determined from recent intense activity by the user (132; forexample from his recently uploaded Tom's CFi's) as well as hishistorically tracked past activities that the user (Tom version of 132)may be classified as a potential evangelist for topic ‘A’. Since theuser is detected to now be again intensely involved with topic ‘A’, buttaking a short break (in a machine-detected user idle mode); theSTAN_(—)2 system automatically pops open a somewhat intrusive proposalas shown by pushed dialog box 318. There could be various reasons whythe STAN_(—)2-monitored user will agree to becoming a so-called STAN-REPwith regard to topic ‘A’ when the latter topic is covered by contentappearing on an external platform such as FaceBook™. One reason forvolunteering is that the potential evangelist (Tom) for topic ‘A’ maywish to promote discussion about topic ‘A’ (it could for example be apolitical cause Tom strongly believes in) among a greater number ofpeople and that alone is reason enough for agreeing to be a STAN-REP fortopic ‘A’. Alternatively or additionally, the STAN_(—)2 system may offervarious types of incentives such as lottery prize opportunities oraccomplishment-based prizes (e.g., being pictured as the STAN-REP of theMonth to his peers) for participating STAN-REP's who produce aboveaverage results. For example, monetary and/or subscription levelenhancement prizes may be given out to participating STAN-REP's who arevoted by members of their respectively serviced TC's or TCONE's ashaving brought in the best and most useful cross-pollination data (CPD)this month, week, day, etc. The awarding of such prizes may becommunicated to other STAN-REP's so as to encourage the rest to tryharder. In one embodiment, and of importance, the BE-A-STAN-REP proposal318 is pushed onto this particular registered member (e.g., Tom 132 u 1)of the STAN_(—)2 community because he is proficient in two or morelanguages that are highly useful for the topic being covered by theparticular STAN_(—)2 system node (or TCONE) from which he will belaunched (similar to how a CPAP is launched—see FIG. 4B) and/or he isproficient in an esoteric technical aspect of the topic and/or inesoteric technical or slang jargon used with respect to the topic. Byway of example, let it be assumed that Topic A is a technical one whichis covered by German and Swedish periodicals as well as technicalpeer-reviewed journals written in English. (Note the optional German andSwedish discussion groups in discussions space 225 of FIG. 2.) If theuser who is being invited to BE-A-STAN-REP (318) in FIG. 3A isproficient in one or both of German and Swedish as well as English, hemay be particularly of value to the other members of the launching TC orTCONE (e.g., 216 n) who are not equally proficient in one or bothforeign languages because he can identify topic relevant content withinthe foreign language using discussion groups and he can cause thatforeign-based content to be returned to the hive, for optional automatedtranslation by the STAN_(—)2 system before it is presented as apost-translation proposed cross-pollination data package (262/264/252)for possible absorption by the launching TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 n). As aresult, English-only conversant members of Tom's on-Topic ‘A’, favoriteTCONEs or TCs may have intelligible access to on-topic information fromthe foreign language using content sources thanks to Tom's ability touse multiple languages and Tom's willingness to serve as a STAN-REP.

The pushed proposal window 318 (e.g., “Please volunteer”) has anexternal language specifying area 318 aa in it. The illustrated exampleindicates that the system is asking the would-be-volunteer (Tom) toserve as a STAN-REP for English-only discussion groups in the namedexternal platform (e.g., FaceBook™) However, if the would-be-volunteer'spersonal profile records (e.g., Tom's active CpCCp or active DsCCp's—seegiF. 1B and 1C) indicate he is generally proficient in one or moreforeign languages, or better yet he is (as is indicated in his activeDsCCp's) proficient in an on-topic highly technical and/or esotericaspect of the one or more foreign languages (where technical jargon inforeign languages may not be known to lay speakers of those languagesjust as technical aspects of English; i.e. those relating to chemistry,physics, advanced math, etc. may not be understood by lay speakers ofEnglish), then the pushed proposal window 318 could have alternativelyand automatically asked in region 318 aa for the would-be-volunteer toserve as a STAN-REP for German-only or combined German and Englishdiscussion groups in the named external platform (e.g., FaceBook™). Theproposed language combinations may be trilingual as well as bilingual.The proposed language options of window region 318 aa may alternativelyor additionally indicate a desired technical jargon proficiency as wellas language proficiency. For example, and even though not shown in FIG.3A, window region 318 aa might have indicated a need for proficiency inEnglish AND Biochemistry or a need for proficiency in Japanese ANDComputer Science, and so on. The method of presenting the “PleaseVolunteer” proposal 318 may vary depending for example on the nature ofthe local data processing device (e.g., 132 a) that the proposed-to user(e.g., Tom) is using when the proposal is made. More specifically, ifthe local data processing device is set to use an audio-only interface(because Tom is driving his car at the time, the “Please Volunteer”proposal and responses thereto may be carried out in an audio-only mode.On the other hand, if the local data processing device the proposed-touser (e.g., Tom) is using at the time the proposal (318) is made has arelatively small viewing screen (e.g., it is a small palm held device),different parts of the proposal may be presented in sequence andvoice-over audio explanations may be provided at the same time to theuser (e.g., Tom) to make it more clear what is being proposed and whyand what alternative options are available.

In one embodiment, the would-be-volunteer (Tom) may activate the scrolldown options tool (the down-pointing triangle) in the variable languageproposing region 318 aa to thereby pick an alternate option. Morespecifically, with such a pick, the would-be-volunteer may be indicatingback to the STAN_(—)2 system, ‘Thank you for asking. However, althoughmy profile indicates I am proficient in technical Russian as well as inQuantum Mechanical Physics, I am not feeling up to such a challenge andinstead I am willing to volunteer only for English and NewtonianPhysics’. If after that, the user hits the OK pushbutton 318 b, theSTAN_(—)2 system may approve the counter offer or it may politely turnhim down.

Before moving on to describe other virtual pushbuttons of popped up pane318, it is to be noted that just as there may be need forwould-be-volunteers to serve in multi-lingual environments (e.g.,English and Korean) and/or in highly technical subareas of specifiedlanguages (e.g., Chinese and Semiconductor Fabrication expertise); inthe case of some topic areas there could be a desire forwould-be-volunteers who are proficient in two or more areas of expertisethat are normally far apart from one another. By way of example,consider the well known book in computer science by Fredrick R. Brooks,entitled “The Mythical Man-Month”, 1995 (ISBN 0-201-83595-9). Itdescribes how adding more workers to a software development project cannot only fail to speed up completion of the project, but may very wellslow it down severely or cause the project to fail all together.Consider also for sake of example, an area of economic study known astransaction cost theory and Managerial-Behavioral theories. In one sensetransaction cost theory and the like can cross-correlate with aspects ofThe Mythical Man-Month. Typically, computer science professionals flockinto discussions mostly with other computer science professionals andeconomics theorists flock together mostly with other economics theorists(per the adage, birds of feather flock together). However there may beinstances where a discussion group on computer science (e.g., discussingThe Mythical Man-Month) may be drifting in terms of discussed topictoward confluence with a discussion group on economics (e.g., thathappens to be discussing Managerial-Behavioral and transaction costtheories). In such a case it may be useful to members of both groups tomerge their discussions. However, a competent cross-disciplinary personis often needed to bridge the language chasm between the twodisciplines. More specifically, the computer science professionals mayuse a first language “frame” that is unique to computer scientists andthe economics theorists may use a different second language “frame” thatis unique to them, whereby only a competent-in-both cross-disciplinaryperson can serve as a living Rosetta Stone, so to speak and thus helpcreate a cross-frame dictionary (see briefly 406 c of FIG. 4C) thatallows the two otherwise disparate groups to beneficially exchange noteswith one another. Incidentally, the examples given above of crosslanguage and cross discipline capabilities are to be viewed asnon-limiting examples. A given volunteer such as Tom may be someone whocan speak in a lay-person's terms or in a specific type of slang whilealso being proficiently conversant in a highly technical area and thatwould-be-volunteer might be willing to serve as a go-between simplifieror translator for a first group of lay-persons whose topic of discussioncenters about a subject having the highly technical area at its core. Inone embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system automatically recognizes thisspecial attribute of the would-be-volunteer (Tom) from his personalprofile records and asks him to volunteer on this basis by locatingexternal content that correctly explains the highly technical area interms that are understandable by lay members of his home TCONE (e.g.,his favorite in-STAN discussion group, i.e. 216 n on this Topic ‘A’).

To summarize therefore, in accordance with one aspect of the presentdisclosure, proposal defining region 318 aa of popped up pane 318 canpresent the would-be-volunteer (Tom) with a cross disciplines proposal(as between two or more normally disparate disciplines). Once again, thereason that the STAN_(—)2 system would be proposing such an esoteric,cross-disciplines proposal to a given one of its users is because thatuser's personal profile records (e.g., Tom's active CpCCp or activeDsCCp's—see giF. 1B and 1C) indicate he is proficient to a predefineddesired level in both disciplines. If the would-be-volunteer accepts(e.g., by activating the OK button 318 b), then later, when he isresponding to STAN-REP survey questions (see 320 b of FIG. 3C), he willbe helping the STAN_(—)2 system to develop and store across-disciplinary and Rosetta Stone-like, lookup table (see again 406 cof FIG. 4C) whereby keywords, tags etc., of a first identifieddiscipline are cross-correlated to keywords, tags etc., of a secondidentified discipline. This recorded cross-disciplinary, Rosetta Stonelike lookup table may be later used to compile and augment missionguiding data structure (i.e. 116 d′ of FIG. 4B) for launched CPAP'swhere the cross-disciplinary augmentation allows a launchedCross-Pollinating Artificial Persona (CPAP) to automatically findexternal cross-disciplinary Notes Exchanging nodes (e.g., externaldiscussion group sessions) where members of the otherwise disparatediscussion groups (NE's) may benefit from exchanging cross-pollinationmaterial with one another.

Still referring to FIG. 3A, some of the virtual pushbuttons in box 318are substantially similar to those described above for dialog box 182 ofFIG. 1B and thus their function need not be described again, namely,pushbuttons 318 b, 31 bc and 318 d. Introduction message 318 a informsthe user that he is being asked to volunteer to be a special envoy orrepresentative for the STAN_(—)2 system (optionally in a foreignlanguage and/or special discipline) but while he is operating insemi-monitor-free mode within an external platform (FaceBook™ in thisexample) and he appears to be focused upon topic ‘A’ while underauspices of the external platform (FaceBook™ in this example). Byactivating virtual pushbutton 318 g, the user can get more informationabout what this means (including information about potential prizes foragreeing to serve as a STAN-REP). Additionally, in one embodiment, rightclicking (Rt.Clk.) on introduction message 318 a provides help and/ormore information.

Activation of pushbutton 318 e (Not This Topic) lets the STAN_(—)2system know that the user (e.g., Tom 132 u 1) wants to be an evangelist(a STAN-REP) because he is passionate about a certain topic (e.g., adifferent political cause), but not this specific topic ‘A’. Basically,he is letting STAN_(—)2 know that it guessed wrong as to what hisgreater topic of passion is. Perhaps it is topic ‘D’ or morespecifically, sub-topic ‘D2’ of open frames 330 a and 330 d where he hadjust been doing some research using the GoogleWave™ and GoogleGoggles™tools respectively. (GoogleGoggles™ is a search engine tool thatreceives images as input rather than search words and returns associatedwebpages or the like as its results. See results panel 330 g of FIG. 3B.GoogleWave™ is project collaboration tool which can return collaborativeresearch results such as in panel 330 c of FIG. 3A.) In response to theuser pressing pushbutton 318 e, the STAN_(—)2 system may present a nextdialog box (not shown) asking for information about what alternate topicthe user has in mind. In one embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system haspredefined criteria for who may or may not operate as a STAN-REP whilesoloing inside an external platform (e.g., FaceBook™, LinkedIn™, etc.)and may politely refuse the user's offer to volunteer as a STAN-REP forthe alternate topic if the user has insufficient credentials in thatalternate topic (e.g., not enough of a historical record evidencingprobable proficiency, trustworthiness, etc., in that topic ‘D’). In oneembodiment, there is higher level or STAN-SUPER_REP, which level isoccupied by especially trusted and reputable registered members of theSTAN_(—)2 system who are allowed to operate essentially as free-ranginghuman bumble bees; to go anywhere they like and bring back any sort ofnew cross-pollination data they want and present it to the DLUX serversand/or to any topic node they choose. When a STAN-SUPER_REP presses 318e (Not This Topic) or next described 318 f (Not This SN), the STAN_(—)2system lets the STAN-SUPER_REP define whatever alternate topic and/oralternate external platform he/she chooses because the STAN-SUPER_REP ispre-designated by system operators to be a free-roaming representativewho is trusted to pick out any online content he/she deems to benoteworthy as a linking package to be brought back to the STAN_(—)2collective hive. The STAN-SUPER_REP's unlimited ability to choose anyalternate topic and/or alternate external platform with depression ofpushbuttons 318 e and 318 f applies more to FIGS. 3B-3D as shall soon beappreciated. In one embodiment, the STAN-SUPER_REP can self-initiate theposed survey popups of FIGS. 3B-3D (popups 320, 320 b and 320 c) ratherthan waiting for an accepted and downloaded (or in-loaded) spywareprogram (132 s) to automatically push the surveys onto the thenout-of-STAN user (e.g., Thomas 132 u 2).

Activation in FIG. 3A of pushbutton 318 f (Not This SN, not this socialnetwork) lets the STAN_(—)2 system know that the user (e.g., 132) wantsto be an evangelist (a STAN-REP) because he is passionate about thiscertain topic ‘A’, but he does not want to be the STAN-REP inside thespecific external platform (e.g., FaceBook™) that he happens to be usingin window 317 but rather a different platform. In one embodiment, rightclicking (Rt.Clk.) on various pushbuttons or messages whose function theuser does not fully understand (e.g., PB 318 f) provides help and/ormore information about the function and options of the right clicked-onentity. In response to the user pressing pushbutton 318 f, the STAN_(—)2system may present a next dialog box (not shown) asking for informationabout what alternate platform the user has in mind and optionallypresenting the user with a list of plausible selections. In oneembodiment, the STAN_(—)2 system has predefined criteria for who may ormay not operate as a STAN-REP while soloing inside specific ones ofexternal platforms and may politely refuse the users offer to volunteerin the alternate platform if the user has insufficient credentials inthat topic (e.g., not enough of a historical record evidencing probableproficiency in that topic ‘A’ or not a STAN-SUPER_REP) so as to warranthim becoming a volunteer STAN-REP (a CPUP) while soloing in certainexternal platforms for which the STAN_(—)2 system operators indicate(through pre-programmed software) that they want more credentialedCPUP's.

Before moving on to FIG. 3B, it is to be observed in FIG. 3A that oneembodiment of the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 downloads (or in-loads) chatopportunity recommendations (or tweet viewing opportunities otheron-topic content source accessing opportunities) like 315 a, 315 b, 315c, 315 d with additional information objects tacked onto the contentsource recommending (e.g., chat opportunity) glyphs. The tacked on,additional information objects may include one or more of: (a) anindication (e.g., 315 b 1) of how many friends, buddies, contacts, etc.from an external platform are already logically linked to therecommended content source (e.g., to chat opportunity 315 b, becausethey accepted and/or because they were co-invited); (b) an indication(e.g., 315 c 1) of how many or what external groups (e.g., Group 7 inplate 315 c 1) are logically linked to the recommended content source byvirtue one or more of their members being logically linked to therecommended content source, and if so, optionally indicating how suchmembers of the group are so linked (e.g., accepted or merelyco-invited); (c) an indication of what topic the recommended contentsource (e.g., chat opportunity 315 c identified as tied to topic C3)focuses on; and (d) an identification of important/famous//influentialpeople (e.g., Ken54(TPP) in plate 315 d 1) who are currently logicallylinked to the recommended content source (e.g., chat opportunity 315 d),where importance may be as deemed (predefined) by the individual user(e.g., 132) viewing the screen 300 and/or importance may be defined asdeemed so by a group of people whom the individual user haspre-identified to the STAN_(—)2 system as being his delegated selectorsof important people to follow. As already explained above, TPP meansTipping Point Person and in one embodiment, the system flashes a specialTP icon 315 f to help the user intuitively appreciate the significanceof who is being identified as an influential and followed-persona (e.g.,Ken54) that is now deemed to be logically linked to the given chatopportunity (or other recommended Notes Exchange session). Upon seeingthe flashing TP icon 315 f, the user may instantly think to himself,“Why if Ken54 is now logically linked to that recommended content source(e.g., chat opportunity 315 d), then I definitely want to look in on itright now”. In that case the user may immediately double click insidethe border of recommendation glyph 315 d so as to add that chat room tohis left panel of already opened and being followed chat rooms (316 a,etc.). In one embodiment, there is also a temperature gauge icon 315 gthat is movably attached to the central body of the recommendation glyph315 d. It indicates how “hot” the recommended content source (e.g., chatopportunity D2) currently is based on a weighted sum of heating andcooling attributes that may be logically linked to that recommendedcontent source, for example due to certain pro and con (for and against)influential persons now being engaged in a heated Notes Exchange sessionwithin that recommended content source. In one embodiment, the user mayuse his cursor to move a probe tip (hatched triangle area) of thetemperature gauge icon 315 g to instead contact the TC flag 315 e andthereby indicate how “hot” the associated topic center currently is. Orthe user may move the probe tip to instead contact a gadgetrepresentation of a specific persona (e.g., Ken54) or group name (see315 c 1) to thereby cause the temperature gauge icon 315 g to insteadindicate how “hot” the associated persona is or how “hot” the associatednamed group is. The algorithm for determining current temperature mayvary as a function of the entity being probed and/or as a function ofthe user who is doing the probing. For example, current temperature of aprobed TC flag 315 e may be made a function of how many influential(e.g., TPP) personas are currently logically linked to the topic center(as being co-invited or as actually having joined in) and what amount ofheating (positive attribute) or cooling (negative attribute) ‘energy’the weighted aggregate of influential (e.g., TPP) personas is currentlycasting on that topic center (for example with thumb up or thumb downvotes or with their current CVi votes—see giF. 2B). The gauge showntemperature may alternatively indicate how hot of a debate is going oninside the recommended content source (e.g., chat room). Some STAN_(—)2users may wish to keep track of where the hottest debates are on a giventopic rather than where the largest number of general other users are orwhere the largest number of influential users (e.g., Ken54) are flockedtogether. The machine-implemented algorithm for detecting hottestdebates may use a statistical variance function to automaticallydetermine how spread apart the debating parties are in their positionsand it may use various weighting factors so as to give recognizedinfluential debaters more weight than unrecognized debaters. In oneembodiment, premium subscription members of the STAN_(—)2 system cancustom tailor their own ‘temperature’ and ‘energy’ attributingalgorithms according to their desires. Basic subscription members mayhave to rely on template ‘temperature’ and ‘energy’ attributingalgorithms provided by operators of the STAN_(—)2 system.

Suppose the user (e.g., Tom) sees the flashing TP icon 315 f and/or ahot indication on gauge 315 g, but the user is at the moment too busy toopen the recommended content source (e.g., chat room) and in the sameinstant the user thinks to himself, “Why if Ken54 is now logicallylinked to recommended content source (e.g., chat opportunity 315 d)—orif its ‘temperature’ is above 80 degrees—, then I definitely want tolook in on it, but not just right now”. In that case the user may dragand drop the content recommendation (box 315 d) into a saved (e.g.,favorite or recent) content sources area of a resourcessaving-and-retrieval tool such as scrollable tool 336. At a later timewhen the user is not fully occupied by a priority task, he can unscrollthe saving tool 336 and try to pop open the saved content source (e.g.,315 d). In some instances, the saved content source (e.g., if it is anon-the-fly opened and closed chat room) may not be later accessible tohim for any of numerous reasons (e.g., it no longer exists; it hasreached its room population limit and so on). However, the user is notwithout recourse in such a case. An alternate option for the user when,for example he is too busy, is to not pop open the recommended content(e.g., chat room 315 d), but to instead click on a tape recording optionicon 315 r and thus cause the STAN_(—)2 system to record at least atranscript of part of the Notes Exchange session (e.g., chat 315 d) forthe user so the user can review it later. In one embodiment, a menu popsup asking how long of a recording the user wants. In one embodiment, theSTAN_(—)2 system automatically emails the user to remind him he has arecorded transcript now available for review. Yet another alternateoption for the user when, for example he is too busy, is to not pop openthe recommended content (e.g., chat room 315 d), and not to save a linkto the recommended content (e.g., by drag and dropping only box 315 dinto saved content sources area of tool 336), or to not initiate andsave a recording of the recommended content (e.g., by activating icon315 r), but to instead drag and drop TC (topic center) flag 315 e; whosebeing-dragged copy is shown as phantom flag 315 e′ into the saved topiccenters area of save-and-retrieve tool 336.

At the later time when the user is not fully occupied by a prioritytask, he can unscroll the saving tool 336 and pop open the savedtranscript recording; or saved topic center identification (315 e′); orsaved combination (Combo) of source, topic center and/or attached TPP's.When he does so, the STAN_(—)2 system responsively causes a 2D or 3Dtopic space map similar to what is shown in 3D region 215 of FIG. 2 tobe automatically displayed to the user. The displayed map is by defaultzoomed in on the local neighborhood of the topic center (e.g., Z-pole219 a) of the topic to which the earlier recommended chat room (315 d)primarily belonged. In one embodiment, the earlier recommended chat room(315 d) is highlighted as being hooped around or strongly tethered tothat primary topic center (e.g., Z-pole 219 a) or as having drifted (216d) to a nearby other topic center (e.g., Z-pole 219 b). With the variouson-topic content sources (rings; e.g., chat rooms) in view, the topicmap viewing user (e.g., Tom 132) can attempt to enter those that seemmost promising to him (not necessarily the originally recommended room315 d). As earlier explained, some of the displayed content sources(rings; e.g., chat rooms) may deny him participant level entry or anyentrance at all for any of various reasons (e.g., room population limithas been reached, the room is reserved for a private chat, etc.).

Yet another option for the user who sees the Ken54(TPP) notification inplate area 315 d 1 (where TPP is understood to flag out a Tipping PointPerson) is to left or right click on an attached BuzzMe gadget icon (notshown at 315 d, but similar to 315 c 4 of displayed recommendation glyph315 c). A left single or double click will automatically formulate aMe-Serving BOT (see also 255 of FIG. 2) with launch guides derived byautomated algorithms of the STAN_(—)2 system based on its currentunderstanding (from up- or in-loaded CFi's) of what the user probablyintends as the search strategy for such a Me-Serving BOT where thesearch strategy (detailed below in conjunction with FIGS. 4C-4D)includes a search for external content sources similar to those (of samekind and similar encodings) as that now exemplified by therecommendation/invitation 315 d. A right click on the attached BuzzMeicon of 315 d (not shown at 315 d, see instead 315 c 4) will give theuser more detailed options in a pop out menu to pick from for therebymore specifically tailoring his to be instantiated and launchedMe-Serving BOT (e.g., 255) according to his likings. However, in thecase where the user is too busy at the moment, this latter option may becounterproductive. In either case, the STAN_(—)2 system signals the userthat a corresponding Me-Serving BOT (e.g., 255) has been, or soon willbe formulated (instantiated) and launched on his behalf (the task isappended to a to-do list of the STAN_(—)2 system as data processingbandwidth allows) with the understanding that the user will receive anemail and/or alike other notification when the launched BOT (255)returns with its search results.

It is to be understood that when the flashing TP icon 315 f wasdisplayed to the user, another option he had was to drag and drop a copyof the TP icon 315 f into a saved Tipping Point People (TPP) region ofthe save-and-retrieve tool 336. This has the effect of allowing the userto later declare Ken54 as an influential and preferably followed, otheruser (preferably followed for everything or preferably followed only fora predefined one or more topics). In one embodiment, the user may pickone of a predefined plurality of ‘energy’ (e.g., heat-) radiatingprofiles for attachment to his virtual version of the influentialpersona (e.g., Ken54). The ‘energy’ or ‘heat’ radiating profile maydefine how much positive or negative influencing ‘heat’ energy theinfluential persona (e.g., Ken54) is deemed to project onto nearby topiccenters when that influential persona is interacting with a topic centerthat is in the TC neighborhood (where distance is measured according toa distancing function of topic space 215). When potential chatopportunities or the like are later analyzed and scored in thebackground by the STAN_(—)2 system for possible recommending to the user(e.g., 132), those that feature a preferably to-be-followed (or avoided)persona (e.g., Ken54) as being logically linked to them or as having ahigh aggregate temperature due to aggregated heating by positiveradiations or cooling by negative virtual radiations being projectedthereto (e.g., with 1/r or 1/r² or other radial distance decay) willhave their ranking scores increased by a predetermined or proportionalamount (e.g., +20 points) or appropriately decreased if the effect is anegative one. Premium subscription users of the STAN_(—)2 system may begiven the option to develop more complex scoring rules for various onesof preferably followed persona (e.g., Ken54) and cross-associated topicsor topic centers. In one embodiment, one of the options included in theright-click pop out menu of the BuZZ-Me icon (e.g., 315 c 4) is that ofsearching for external and/or internal content sources that feature thefollowed influential persona (e.g., Ken54) and/or other such influentialpersonas (e.g., Jeff67, Seymour89). One of optional search templatesthat may be automatically or manually in-loaded into a Me-Serving BOT(e.g., 255); or into another form of such BOT, is one that looks todetect if a multitude (exceeding a predefined threshold number) offollowed, influential personas (e.g., 229 in FIG. 2) are flockingtowards (where such ‘towards’ flocking is denoted by path 229 a) aspecific TC neighborhood (e.g., 219 a). If that is found to be the case,then the influencer's heat-seeking search template operates toautomatically home in on such a hot spot (e.g., 219 a) and optionally onexternal platform rings (e.g., 226) pointed to by the in-STAN hot spot(e.g., 219 a when TPP's 229 flock to it). As already mentioned, bounceback path 229 c allows a topic space browsing user to seek outinfluential personas (e.g., 229) who are now flocking, or have in thepast flocked to a particular TC (e.g., 219 a) or TCONE (e.g., 216 c).The topic space browsing user who seeks out the influential personas(e.g., 229) may want to send a question or other online message to thoseinfluencers (229; e.g., Ken54, Jeff67, Seymour89, Jim32, Gid10) aboutthe same or a related topic. In one embodiment, the STAN_(—)2 systemautomatically generates a template email or the like addressed to thedesired influencers.

Still referring to FIG. 3A, in one embodiment, if the user holds down aspecial key such as the Control key when dragging his cursor from thevicinity of a STAN_(—)2 recommended content source (e.g., 315 d), then aplurality or all of the associated objects (e.g., TC flag 315 e, TPP 315d 1, Group ID (in 315 c 1), link to the recommended content source,partial transcript, etc.) may be simultaneously dragged and dropped intorespective ‘Combo’ save-and-retrieve subareas of the save-and-retrievetool 336.

In one embodiment, the user is given the option of color coding variousparts of different icons that have been downloaded (or in-loaded) fromthe STAN_(—)2 system into his local data processing device (e.g., CPU-3132 a). In one embodiment, a color coding options tool bar 319 isautomatically displayed to the user. Within this color coding optionstool bar 319, the user is given the options of selecting colors,hatchings, textures and so on for respective ones of displayed icons oftext in the STAN_(—)2 driven recommendations banner 315. For example, ifplate 315 b 1 is indicating the presence of FaceBook™ friends, then atleast a portion of plate 315 b 1 will be colored, textured, blinked,etc. in accordance with one or more selections made by the user inscroll down menu 319 b. Adjacent and counterpart scroll down menu 319 aof course lists the attribute that is to be so tagged with color and/orother graphic markers (e.g., highlighting). Companion scroll down menu319 c and 319 d show other example where the user is causing indicatorsrelated to the LinkedIn™ external platform to be different coloredand/or otherwise marked. In scroll down menu pair 319 ef, the user canpick other attributes and associated color and/or other graphic markers(e.g., highlightings). The OTHR attribute does not have to be theidentification of another external platform. It could instead be anidentification of a topic center (TC) or of a topic domain within whichone or more topic centers (child topic nodes) reside. It could insteadbe an identification of a single or predefined group of followedpersonas (e.g., Ken54). In one embodiment, the user has the option ofincreasing or decreasing the number of ancillary icon objects (e.g., 315d 1, 315 e, 315 f, 315 g) that are displayed in banner area 315 so as tothereby make the banner area less cluttered or more detailed as desired.And of course, the user has the option of minimizing the recommendationsbanner area 315 to a bottom, top or side tray as may be preferred.

Referring to FIG. 3B, it is assumed here that user 132 has virtuallypressed the OK pushbutton 318 b of FIG. 3A at an earlier time. Ofimportance, in the environment 301 of FIG. 3B (also environment 132 e2/132 u 2 of FIG. 1A), the volunteering user (CPUP 132, who was “Tom”but now is calling himself “Thomas”) is not being directly monitored bythe STAN_(—)2 system 110/210 anymore (by way of CFi's or CVi's). Themonitoring status box 312′ indicates that interest monitoring is turnedOFF (and in the illustrated example, scrollable opportunities banner315/315 ss is thus no longer displayed). Either the user 132 has justturned it off or he shut down his computer and at a later time loggedinto external platform 120 but not into platform 110.

Something happened between the time when the volunteering user (CPUP132, then calling himself “Tom” in environment 132 e 1) pressed the OKpushbutton 318 of FIG. 3A and the time when the pushed survey 320 ofFIG. 3B appears. In that interim time the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210automatically (but with user 132's knowing permission) caused a spywareprogram 132 s to be downloaded (or in-loaded) from the STAN_(—)2platform 110 and via secured messaging link 132 m into theuser-designated physical or virtually instantiated CPUs (e.g., 132 b)where the latter will be interfacing on a sometimesnot-STAN_(—)2-monitored basis with the external platform 120. The latterhappens when user 132 is logged on as “Thomas” (for example) into theexternal platform 120 but not into platform 110 as “Tom”. The downloadedspyware program 132 s is not as capable as the full STAN_(—)2 system 110(e.g., a cloud computing supported system) to automatically determinewhat topic of interest Thomas (132) is currently focusing upon whenflying solo inside of external platform 120. In one embodiment, forexample, the spyware program 132 s does not upload (or in-load) CFi's orCVi's to the STAN_(—)2 system. The down or in-loaded spyware program 132s is however configured to have some modicum of intelligence and toselectively intrude on Thomas with a predefined and pushed survey 320when one of a few predetermined triggering events happens, such as whencertain predefined keywords (e.g., keywd1 317 b′) appear while at thesame time an unmonitored Thomas (132) is logged into a predeterminedexternal interest group (e.g., 224 of FIG. 2). In one embodiment, it hasbeen predetermined beforehand that general topic “A” of FIG. 3A (orsub-topic A4) is more likely than not to come up when Thomas (132) islogged into that predetermined interest group (e.g., 224 of FIG. 2).Otherwise the downloaded spyware program 132 s remains substantiallydormant and just periodically checks to see if Thomas (132) is loggedinto that predetermined interest group (e.g., 224 of FIG. 2). Thedownloaded spyware program 132 s may occasionally also use securedchannel 132 m (FIG. 1A) to see if there are any updates for it to bedownloaded (or in-loaded) from the STAN_(—)2 platform 110 into CPU-4(132 b).

In the state where survey dialog box 320 is being presented to the user(Thomas 132) in FIG. 3B, it is the downloaded spyware program 132 s andnot the full STAN_(—)2 system that is controlling the survey. It isassumed for the case of FIG. 3B that user Thomas (having logged in viainterface 128 into platform 120 with user ID 132 u 2) is deeplyembroiled in a social networking exchange inside platform 120 with otherusers of that external platform 120. Thomas is probably not thinkingabout the STAN_(—)2 system and its needs. But at this time, thedownloaded spyware program 132 s detects that Thomas is logged into thepredefined external users' group 224 and that one or more of predefinedkeywords (e.g., 317 b′) have been recently used to an extent exceeding apredefined threshold in the highlighted window 317′ (the window, frameor pane where within members of the predefined external users group 224are exchanging notes). Incidentally, the survey triggering algorithmdoes not have to be based on keywords or keywords alone. It could bealternatively or additionally based on predefined meta-tags, or onpredefined MetaWeb™ entity identifications, and so on and these may beburied inside a subframe 317 a′ of the highlighted window 317′.) Inresponse to this unique set of survey triggering circumstances, thedownloaded spyware program 132 s automatically causes the intrusivesurvey dialog box 320 to be pushed into the attention area of the user(Thomas). (Or if the user interface is purely audio at the time, theintrusive survey akin to dialog box 320 may be in purely audio format.)The displayed content in the survey dialog box 320 is a function of notonly the user having earlier pressed pushbutton 318 b (OK) in FIG. 3Aand the accepted spyware program 132 s having been downloaded (orin-loaded) into Thomas's computer 132 b. The displayed content of surveybox 320 is also a function of various keywords, meta-tags, MetaWeb™ ID's(buried in 317 a′), etc. being picked out by the downloaded spywareprogram 132 s as being present in the FaceBook™ driven user window 317′(now highlighted by action of the spyware program 132 s) that iscurrently the basis of the pushed survey 320. Pushbutton options 318 c′through 318 g′ have already been described with reference to FIGS. 1Band 3A and thus do not need repeated explanation here. Introductionmessage 321 reinforces for the volunteering user (CPUP 132, a.k.a.Thomas) the nature of the task he is being asked to undertake and forwhom he is being asked to do this (for STAN). The user has been recentlyusing window of frame 317′ that is being driven by an external platform(FaceBook™ in this example) and now a survey triggering event such aspresence of one or more keywords such as 317 b′ (keywd1) within thesubject window 317′ are highlighted by operation of the spyware program132 s to thereby show the volunteered user (CPUP 132) what contenttriggered the spyware program 132 s to present the pushed surveyproposal 320.

Different external platforms use different terminologies or metaphorsfor marking off different parts of their virtual geographies. The “THISNODE” descriptor in selection box 321 a of message 321 may not be thebest descriptor for FaceBook™ and instead may have said THIS WALL orTHIS GROUP. In one embodiment, the user can pick a different terminologyand can right click to get more information or options in selection box321 a. Selection box 321 b reinforces the identity of the externalplatform (FaceBook™ in this example). In some embodiments, the user(e.g., a STAN-SUPER_REP) may select a different external platform nameas being the more correct name for the platform that is driving thecontent originally shown in window 317′ (before spyware program 132 sstarts highlighting some of it). The choices made in selection boxes 321a and 321 b are mirror copied into associated boxes 321 aa and 321 bb.

A first voting (or survey question) 322 presented to the volunteeringuser (CPUP 132) inquires as to whether what is happening inside the nowhighlighted window 317′ is worthy of further attention. In other words,does it represent an emerging hot topic or hot topic domain in thebeing-surveyed-about FaceBook™ environment (e.g., discussion group 224)?There is no need at this time to define what the topic or topic domainis. The survey 320 is merely testing to first see if the surveyed user(Thomas) merely “feels” that something of attention worthy value is nowhappening inside highlighted window 317′. (Unlike human in-the-fieldagents like Thomas, automated CPAP's cannot “feel” and thus they cannotprovide emotion-based evaluation of what is developing in externaldiscussion group windows such as 317′.) It should be recalled thatSTAN_(—)2 monitoring is OFF (per box 312′) at this time and thereforethe STAN_(—)2 system cannot be aware of what is now happening insidewindow 317′ or how the STAN-(SUPER or regular)-REP user 132 isresponding to it (feeling about it) emotionally and/or otherwise basedon uploaded ones of his CFi's and CVi's because the latter are not beinguploaded into the STAN_(—)2 system. However, since the downloadedspyware program 132 s detected that a usage threshold has been crossedby the user as he interacts with content inside window 317′, that couldbe indicative of an important and survey-worthy new development in thesubject social networking space (e.g., 224) or not. The STAN_(—)2 system110 is relying on Thomas to report back about it via the securedmessaging provided by communications link 132 m of FIG. 1A and via thesurvey process being mediated by the downloaded spyware program 132 s.The simple vote options in FIG. 3B allow Thomas to quickly indicate(with a simple turn on of radio button 323 for example) that in hishumble opinion (IMHO) this is an emerging and hot topic “domain” or ahot topic “node” (if selection of later is made in box 323 a).Alternatively, Thomas may vote (with radio button 324) that the activitycurrently developing in window 317′ represents merely an alreadyestablished “warm” (not shown selection that is nonetheless chooseable)topic domain per the default options presented in voting line 324. Itcould also be deemed a “cold” or “old” topic by Thomas. Alternatively,Thomas may vote (with radio button 325) for the none-of-the-aboveoption. This locally cast and recorded vote is eventually reported backto the STAN_(—)2 system via messaging link 132 m (when STAN_(—)2 hasspare bandwidth for such low priority information being down orin-loaded into to it from metaphorically, out-in-the-field spywareprograms 132 s).

The spyware-pushed first survey page 320 provides the user (Thomas) witha pushbutton option 326 b of casting the first vote and immediatelythereafter quitting the survey so as to thus not be bothered by furthersurvey questions at this time. In response to such a survey quittingaction, the downloaded spyware program 132 s collects the identity ofthe surveyed user (Thomas), the identity of the associated externalplatform (e.g., FaceBook™), the identity of the discussion group (224)that triggered the survey push 320, an identification of current usersinside that discussion group if possible, and the time date and time ofthe vote as well as Thomas's cast voting information and eventuallyrelays it back to the STAN_(—)2 system 110 (as a cross-pollination datapackage—explained below). Many volunteered STAN-REP users like Thomaswill also be reporting back with their ID's, their votes and theirrespective impressions about the same and/or other external discussionsessions (e.g., 226). The STAN_(—)2 system will be automaticallycollecting all these votes and impression reports, sorting them (e.g.,as to topic center of origin of the volunteer), weighting them (e.g.,according to who are more influential or more trustworthy STAN-REP usersand who less so), summing and normalizing the weighted and counted votesand developing trending maps or histograms that will help the STAN_(—)2system to automatically or with aid of its human operators, determinewhere the trending-to-hot discussions and/or topics are out there in theSTAN_(—)2-not-monitored external content space (not-monitored because noSTAN_(—)2 user is focusing upon that external content area with his orher SS2 monitoring switch 312 turned ON). However, a top priority of theSTAN_(—)2 system remains that of first servicing its currently logged-inmembers, collecting their CFi's, CVi's, and responsively makingautomated content source recommendations to them. As mentioned, thesurveying of user impressions (e.g., Thomas's) about content found onexternal platforms (e.g., 120) is a lower priority task and is carriedout as, and if, spare bandwidth becomes available within the dataprocessing resource banks of the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210. Since thespyware program 132 s can record its collected data and wait until theSTAN_(—)2 system flags that it is ready to receive spyware programmessages (because spare bandwidth is now available), the STAN_(—)2system is not unduly burdened with having to deal in real time withreports at the instant they become available from the many,out-in-the-field spyware programs 132 s.

Still referring to user actions in FIG. 3B, if on the other hand, theuser (Thomas) virtually presses pushbutton option 326 a, the downloadedspyware program 132 s responsively presents a next survey page such aspage 320 b shown in FIG. 3C. In this next surveying box (320 b) thedownloaded spyware program 132 s is gathering more detailed information;for example, which words and/or other content inside highlighted window317″ does Thomas think/feel are best representative of what is going oninside of window 317″? Again, the spyware program 132 s is not askingThomas to do any deep thinking at the moment and to insightfully defineor describe the topic of discussion that is emerging in the socialnetworking (SN) exchange happening inside highlighted window 317″. Thedownloaded (or in-loaded) spyware program 132 s may automaticallyprovide default suggestions such as keywords (e.g., 317 c′) that it hasautomatically picked out of highlighted window 317″. This may helpreduce Thomas's workload if and when he decides to respond to the poppedopen survey window. (Thomas may elect to minimize the window—by using aminimize icon in the upper right corner—and to get back to the surveyshortly afterwards.) Although default suggested keywords (e.g., 323 b″)are displayed when the survey 320 is popped open, a scroll down optionis provided in each checkable vote box like 323 b″ to thereby allowThomas to pick something else or to copy and paste (or drag and drop)another part of highlighted window 317″ (e.g., the being dragged object323 c″) so as to make it a checked on vote option in place of thosesuggested by the spyware program 132 s.

Voting line 324″ lets Thomas indicate which of possible ‘TAG’ words thatcan be associated with highlighted window 317″ is or are in his humbleopinion (IMHO) best representative of what is going on inside thehighlighted window 317″. Similar to the pick or drag-and-drop option forkeywords (323 c″, 336 e″), the spyware program 132 s lets Thomas chooseor fill in (e.g., by drag-and-drop or type-in) alternate vote responsesin place of the default ones originally displayed in the TAGs votingline 324″.

Voting line 325″ lets Thomas indicate which of possible hyperlinks(e.g., URL's, universal resource locators) appearing in highlightedwindow 317″ (e.g., URL6) is or are best representative of what is goingon inside the highlighted window 317″. Similar to the drag-and-dropoption for keywords (323 c″, 336 e″), the spyware program 132 s letsThomas fill in alternate vote response in place of the default onesoriginally displayed in the key Users voting line 325″.

In one embodiment, a displayed scroll bar 327″ lets Thomas scroll downto see other, vote-upon options and he can choose which to vote on andwhich to ignore as he sees fit. For example, the other vote-upon optionsmay ask: which images are best representative (for possible submissionto GoogleGoggles™ or an equivalent tool). In one embodiment, when Thomasclicks on a vote line (not shown) directed to “buried” meta-tags,“buried” MetaWeb™ identifiers and so on, the locations of those “buried”objects are indicated on his screen 302 by highlighting or flashing ofcorresponding pixels in target window 317″. In one embodiment, scrollbar 327″ lets Thomas scroll to a representative users voting line (notshown, but see also FIG. 3D) that lets Thomas indicate which of possibleuser names appearing in highlighted window 317″ is or are bestrepresentative of what is going on inside the highlighted window 317″.Similar to the drag-and-drop option for keywords (323 c″, 336 e″), thespyware program 132 s lets Thomas fill in alternate vote response inplace of the default ones originally displayed in the key Users votingline (not shown). In one embodiment, when a user name (e.g., usr3) ispicked up from a window (317″) that is being driven by an externalplatform (e.g., 120), the identification of that external platform(e.g., FaceBook™) is concatenated to the picked up user name (e.g.,usr3) and the concatenated combination is what is sent back to theSTAN_(—)2 system as part of the votes or survey answers gatheringoperation. This is done because a same user can have respectivedifferent user names on respective different platforms and thus a“Ken54” (for example) on a first platform (e.g., 142) may not be thesame person as a “Ken54” on a second platform (e.g., 144). It is to beunderstood that when users are identified by the STAN_(—)2 systemaccording to their user name, the identification generally includessomething more than just the raw user name (e.g., “Ken54”) so that thespecific person being referenced by that user name is correctly pointedto (as best as can be practically done). In one embodiment, thedisplayed scroll bar 327″ is configured to present survey questions ofmore complex or difficult nature the further down the vertical thatThomas scrolls. The more difficult questions may ask Thomas to startdefining the general and specific topic nodes (of topic space 215) thatthe current discussion in target window 317″ is most nearly connectedwith.

With regard to identifying STAN_(—)2 topic nodes, in one embodiment, afinite subset of the topic nodes in topic space 215 of FIG. 2 are madeunmovable and are assigned respective fixed root locations in that space215 and are assigned fixed virtual distances as between each other. (Aroot location is a 3D point and does not have to reside on the Z=0plane.) It should be recalled that in general, most topic nodes (whoselocations are represented in FIG. 2 for example by Z-poles such as 219 aand 219 b) can migrate in position within the topic space 215 due toshifting moods of the membership population that currently occupies andcontrols the TCONEs (rings) that are logically hooped or stronglytethered to the respective topic nodes (a.k.a. topic centers or TC's).Members of a given TCONE or a given topic center can vote to move theirrespective TCONE or whole topic center to a different topic domain ifthey so choose. Accordingly, a general purpose topic center is avariable and movable software entity (as represented by physical and notelusively transitory signals). Nonetheless, a finite number of unmovableand fixed in location (in topic space 215) Z-poles are virtually createdin accordance with one embodiment for the purpose of serving asreference points around which the variable and movable other entitiesmay orbit or move between. In other words, the finite set of unmovableroot points and/or Z-poles may be viewed as if they were fixed stars (orvirtual GPS satellites) in an otherwise constantly shifting sky dome. Inone embodiment, the finite set of unmovable root points or Z-poles aredefined as MetaWeb™ like entities and are assigned MetaWeb™ orequivalent identifications that can be universally used by participantsof the Internet for pinpoint wise pointing to those unmovable rootpoints or Z-poles in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215. In one embodiment,neighborhoods around the unmovable root points or Z-poles (e.g.,MetaWeb™ pinpointed points/poles) may be defined by providing one ormore virtual radius values as measured relative to surrounding fixedroot points or Z-poles. In this way a topic “neighborhood” thatsurrounds a fixed root point or Z-pole may be specified. Specific pointsand/or micro-neighborhoods in the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 may also bespecified by triangulating as between three or more of the GPS-like,fixed root points or Z-poles.

While the above discussion regarding root points, Z-poles and topicspace (215) might be argued by others to be “abstract”, the inventorshere are directing this disclosure to the non-abstract andmachine-implemented carrying out of these teachings wherein realphysical signals (e.g., electromagnetic signals) are physicallytransmitted through and as between real physical machines (e.g.,computers, servers, cloud computing centers) and stored in physicalmemory devices thus transforming the memory devices from one physicalstate to another). The inventors here are directing this disclosure tothe non-abstract and machine-implemented carrying out of these teachingswherein real physical and not-elusively transitory signals, thatconsistently represent the here described virtual entities, are used,stored and interacted with one another and/or in accordance withpredefined, non-abstract instructing signals (e.g., software) thatcontrol the actions of non-abstract instructable machines so as toactually effect the outcomes described herein. As such, unsupportedallegations (if any) about the present disclosure being directed toun-useful and abstract arts are to be seen as being wholly withoutmerit.

Before moving on to the next survey taking screen 303 of FIG. 3D,attention is redirected here to the multi-platform, multi-frameworkdepiction of FIG. 2. The Z-direction axis of frame 210 xyz of topicspace 215 may be viewed as having points disposed therealong whichrepresent any selected ones or combinations of potentially differingattributes of each of the TCONE's (or rings) that hooped around (ortethered to) respective ones of the Z-poles (only a few shown as such at219 a and 219 b so as to avoid illustrative clutter). One of thepotentially differing attributes of each of the TCONE's, as may berepresented by spaced apart points on the Z-axis of frame 210 xyz, canbe maximum number of participating members allowed at one time insidethe Notes Exchange activity (the “NE” part of the TCONE acronym) of thecorresponding TCONE. Since respective TCONEs can be formed with manydifferent and respective values for such participating populace limits,the TCONE's may be viewed as being stacked with larger sized ones ofallowable population on the bottom and smaller ones towards the top tothereby create the impression of a cone formed by an ordered stacking ofthe hoops (rings) as shown for example at 219 a in FIG. 2. However, atleast some TCONEs may be deemed to have no thickness in the Z-direction.Accordingly any desired number of TCONEs with a chat room populationlimit of say 5 members maximum may be stacked about a Z-pole (orstrongly tethered to that Z-pole) without taking away Z-direction spacethat is usable for other attributes of the respective TCONEs.

Another attribute that is assignable to the different TCONEs is that ofminimum required (and possibly also maximum allowed) “expertise” in thetopic of the topic center owned note exchange (TCONE). Level ofexpertise in the given topic, like room population, may be viewed asdefining the radius of the respective TCONE. For example, a NotesExchange (NE) session that requires a very high level of expertise (andfor example into languages) might be symbolized as having a very smallhoop radius while a Notes Exchange session that allows for a relativelybroad class of people to participate (e.g., expertise level frombeginner to novice, intermediate and so forth and in only a singlelay-person's language) might be symbolized as having a relatively largerhoop radius and thus cone structures with such variations of hoop radiusmight be displayed to a user when the user navigates to the topic space215 (via connection path 218) so that the user may perceive it as asorted and thus organized set, the various options available to him orher when viewing a topic center neighborhood or browsing through theSTAN_(—)2 topic space 215 in search of a Notes Exchange (NE) sessionthat the user might want to view and/or enter into as a Notes Exchangingparticipant.

In one embodiment, a STAN_(—)2 user (e.g., 212) who is viewing aSTAN_(—)2 generated display of the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 mayvariably reset the Z-axis of frame 210 xyz to represent any one or moreattributes in a desired ordered fashion, for example as a multivariatecombination of average historical room population and average level ofparticipant expertise. In one embodiment of a STAN_(—)2 generateddisplay of its topic space 215, at least some of the 3D cones displayedas each primarily belonging to a respective topic center (to a Z-pole)are composed not just of stacked hoops of changing radius but as stacksof layers each having cones in that layer (see 216 f as an example ofsuch a cones-containing layer) where the mini-cones in each layer mayhave individual TCONEs. This approach may be fractal-wise carried out toan Nth degree where N=2, 3, etc. For example, if N=3, each macro conehas layers of mini-cones and each mini-cone has its own plural layers ofmicro-cones where the micro-cones finally are formed of stacked TCONErings. It is within the contemplation of the present disclosureincidentally to display the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215 with methods thatshow more than 3 dimensions at a time. For example, time sequencedsnapshots of the topic space 215 may be displayed wherein the attributerepresented by the Z-axis switches from one displayed snapshot to thenext. Color coding may be used to differentiate between one snapshot andthe next as they are displayed in round robin fashion.

With that explained, the connection between FIG. 3B and FIG. 2 can nowbe better explained. The surveyed user (e.g., Thomas) was acting as amore intelligent (and “feelings” capable) substitute for a CPAP like260. By answering the various questions of survey page 320 b (FIG. 3B),the surveyed user, together with the automated survey return action ofthe spyware program 132 s, was gathering up cross-pollination data (262and 264) from an external platform node (e.g., 226) wherein an externalgroup (e.g., 224) was engaged in a Notes Exchange session (e.g., chatroom discussion, blog comments, etc.). The surveyed user was being usedfor bringing that human-evaluated (voted on) cross-pollination data (262and 264) back to the hive (to the STAN_(—)2 system 110/210), and morespecifically back to the topic center (or TCONE) from which his alterego (Tom) came for processing and possible absorption by that TC orTCONE of origin.

More specifically, either a CPUP (e.g., Thomas plus the spyware program132 s loaded in his computer) or a CPAP (shown as BOT bee 260) returnsto the hive with new cross-pollination data (262 and 264). Then thatdata is automatically analyzed by the STAN_(—)2 system to determine whattopic nodes it might belong to (if it is raw CFi data such as providedby Lurking BOTS like 116 c) and/or if a topic center (TC) does notalready exist that corresponds to the cross-pollination data, whether anew topic center (e.g., 216 n) should now be instantiated to receivethat returned data package. Usually the answer is yes, a topic nodealready exists, because Thomas (132 in FIG. 1A) originated from aSTAN_(—)2 topic center to begin with (unless in the rare exception,Thomas is a free ranging STAN-SUPER_REP). The logical linking of Thomasto one or a limited few STAN_(—)2 topic centers happened in FIG. 3A whenThomas pressed the virtual OK button 319 b and agreed to be a STAN-REPfor a specified topic (e.g., Topic A) and for a specific externalplatform (e.g., FaceBook™). At that time, the STAN_(—)2 systemautomatically recorded in its database (119) the association between theID of the volunteering STAN_(—)2 user (Thomas, actually operating as Tomat that point but whose alternate UBID-2 is obtainable from alias lookuprecord 184 of FIG. 1B) and the topic he or she was agreeing to besurveyed on and the external platform (e.g., FaceBook™) for which thesurveys will be conducted. Accordingly, when the spyware program 132 sin Thomas's physical or virtually instantiated CPU automatically reportsback with Thomas's ID and the ID of the external platform and the ID ofthe external discussion group (e.g., 224), the STAN_(—)2 system canautomatically generate a corresponding logical link (e.g., 261) andrecord it as such in its DB 119 where the link extends between theexternal discussion (e.g., 226) and/or the external discussion group(e.g., 224) and the topic center (e.g., 216 n) from which Thomasoriginated when he originally volunteered to be a STAN-REP. In oneembodiment, the volunteering user has limited access to his STAN-REPaccount and can perform various system allowed actions such astemporarily de-volunteering or trying to change his volunteer parameters(e.g., the ones established in FIG. 3A).

After either a CPUP (e.g., Thomas plus the spyware program 132 s loadedin his computer) or a Searching-type CPAP (BOT bee 260) returns to thehive with new cross-pollination data (262 and/or 264 and/or 252 as shallsoon be described) and presents that new cross-pollination data to acorresponding topic center (e.g., 216 n), in one embodiment, thatpresented cross-pollination data (pCPD 262/264/252) is not immediatelyabsorbed into the topic node itself and/or into specific TCONE's (rings)of the TC (e.g., 216 n). Instead, vote-eligible members of the TC and/orTCONE may first inspect and vote on the admissibility and value(ranking) of the presented cross-pollination data (262/264/252).Alternatively or additionally, a data buffering program provided by theSTAN_(—)2 system for each TC or TCONE may first or substitutionallyinspect and vote on the admissibility and value (ranking) of thepresented cross-pollination data (262/264/252), where after if theautomated filtering is not a substitutional one, live members of the TCand/or TCONE may elect to further inspect and vote on the admissibilityand value (ranking) of the presented cross-pollination data. Accordinglynot all pCPD (presented cross-pollination data such as 262/264/252) isabsorbed and logically linked to a core center (216 c) of the TC orTCONE to which it is brought by a CPUP or CPAP. Some pCPD (e.g., 254)may be wholly or partially rejected by the surrounding buffer (216 b) ofthe corresponding core center (216 c) of the respective TC or TCONE.Presented cross-pollination data 254 of rejected (and dejected) BOT 253represents an example of such wholly or partially rejected data.Repeated rejections (e.g., to a BOT with inherited, software-DNA likethat of BOT 253) may operate to reduce populations of search BOTS havingconstantly turned down software-DNA (software defined searchcharacteristics) that brings back the wrong kind of presentedcross-pollination data (262/264/252). Repeated acceptances, on the otherhand, may operate to increase populations of search BOTS havingconsistently approved software-DNA that causes the BOT to bring back theright kind of presented cross-pollination data (262/264/252) to the TCor TCONE (e.g., 216 c) from where it was born (instantiated andlaunched). This aspect will be more clearly understood when step 451 ofFIG. 4C is detailed below.

More specifically in FIG. 2, CPAP 251 (but it could instead be thespyware program 132 s of Thomas's physical local or remotelyinstantiated machine 132 b) is shown bringing back one or more so-calledcross-pollination package(s) 252 where the payload inside thecross-pollination package(s) 252 can be any type of potentially usefulcross-pollination data (CPD) such as, but not limited to: (a) a chosenURL (e.g., URL6 of FIG. 3C) that is believed to be on-topic with regardto the core topic of the destination TC or TCONE (216 c) and is furtherbelieved to be new for that TC or TCONE; (b) a chosen keyword (e.g., 323c″ (keywd5) of FIG. 3C) that is believed to be on-topic with regard tothe core topic and further new for that TC or TCONE; (c) a chosenmeta-tag or overt tag (e.g., 324″ of FIG. 3C) that is believed to beon-topic with regard to the core topic and further new for that TC orTCONE; (d) a chosen user name (e.g., usr3 of FIG. 3C) that is believedto be important with regard to the core topic of the destination TC orTCONE (216 c) and further new relative to other user names alreadylogically linked to that TC or TCONE; and (e) an identification of achosen external discussion group (e.g., 224) and/or of a chosen externaldiscussion thread (e.g., 226) or subthread and/or an identification ofalike other external content that is believed to be of value to the coretopic of the destination TC or TCONE (216 c), new for that TC or TCONE(not yet represented therein by a logical link) and thus worthy ofpartial or wholesale absorption by the destination TC or TCONE (216 c).More generally, the payload inside the cross-pollination package(s) 252can be any type of potentially useful, on-topic “encoding” or on-topiccontent that might be valuable for incorporating into the CPAP or CPUPlaunching TC or TCONE (216 c) or for incorporating into another TC(e.g., 216 n, where n is for “new” here) that may not have yet even beencreated within the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215. (See again the abovedescription of re-routing path 253 a.)

In one embodiment of the STAN_(—)2 system, there is instantiated aso-called “double-cross” pollination operation which may be at leastsome of the time automatically executed (as data processing bandwidthpermits) when a returning BOT (e.g., 255) brings back a payload (e.g.,264 plus 262) containing one or more native user names (such as mayappear in a transcript area 316 b of FIG. 3A) and brings back encodings(e.g., produced Notes, keyword etc.) that are logically linked to thosenative user names; where each native user name or other equivalent useridentification is based on the user account that is native to the sourceexternal platform from where the CP data (254) came from. (That sourceexternal platform will be referred to here also as the first externalplatform.) The logically cross-linked encoding(s) that are thusassociated with the native user name and/or other native user ID may bethe full comment (a Note) that the native user made in an externaldiscussion thread (e.g., in transcript area 316 b or its equivalent) ora full other Note presentation the native user provided or a synopsisthereof or a set of primary encodings extracted therefrom. The logicallycross-linked encoding(s) are automatically tested by the STAN_(—)2system to determine how well they cross-correlate with current topencodings or other attributes (e.g., Top N encodings, Top P pointers, orTop Q drift indicators) of the returned-to launcher TC or TCONE (216 c).If the cross-correlation(s) is/are above predefined threshold(s), theSTAN_(—)2 system searches its database (DB 119) for an aliases lookuprecord (e.g., like 184 of FIG. 1B) that reveals not only theidentification of the target native user on the first externalplatform—from where the payload (264+262) came—but also reveals alterego identifications of the same user on other external platforms and/orwithin the STAN_(—)2 system itself. Then, as data processing bandwidthallows, TC or TCONE-Serving BOTs are launched toward those otherexternal platforms and/or within STAN_(—)2 itself with instructions tosearch for substantially contemporaneous Notes (e.g., discussion groupcontributions) made by the identified target user when in his or heralter ego form on the other (secondary) platforms. These are broughtback by the launched TC or TCONE-Serving BOTs (255) and tested (e.g.,voted on by buffer layer 216 b) for possible relevance the launcher TCor TCONE (216 c). In one embodiment, the targeted native user of thefirst external platform is automatically first asked for permission (onetime or always) by the STAN_(—)2 system to use his alter-ego personas(of the other/secondary platforms and to use the thereto-attributedcontent contributions. In one embodiment, the targeted native user mayelect to have his alter ego other ID's automatically converted into“Anonymous” or the like before such is introduced for possiblecross-pollinating absorption into the launcher TC or TCONE (216 c) spaceof the STAN_(—)2 system. If the targeted native user allows his alterego ID to be shown to STAN_(—)2 users, after viewing the retrievedexternal content, those STAN_(—)2 users may elect to instigate a chatproposal (or other form of proposed Notes Exchange) with the originalauthor(s) by means of a contact bounce back tool (not shown) madeavailable to them by the STAN_(—)2 system. In other words, and forpurpose of summarizing this “double-cross” pollination operation; once arelevant outside user name is found (relevant to the current TC orTCONE, e.g., 216 c), the STAN_(—)2 system automatically uses itsinternal cross-aliases records (e.g., 184) to lookup the alter-egos ofthe same person inside STAN_(—)2 and/or on yet other external platformsand the STAN_(—)2 system then automatically performs a seek to thoseinternal or yet other external sourcing areas to see if yet further andwell cross-correlated cross-pollination data (262/264/252) can bebrought back from the yet further content sources.

It is worthwhile to step back at this point and look at the biggerpicture presented by FIG. 2. With the help of cross-pollinating CPAP's(e.g., 255, 260) and/or CPUP's (e.g., Thomas), a logical link such as261 can be established within the STAN_(—)2 system (in the form oflinking data pointing to an external node) as between a Notes Exchangesession or node (e.g., 226) of an external platform (e.g., 220/120) or acorresponding Notes Exchanging group (e.g., 224) of people and a TC orTCONE (e.g., 216 n or 216 c) within the topic space 215 of the STAN_(—)2system 110/210 and/or with a corresponding Notes Exchanging group (e.g.,213) of people who are users of the STAN_(—)2 system and who arelogically linked to the in-STAN TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 n). This canoccur because an entity (e.g., Thomas 132 u 2) who was at the time offocusing upon relevant content (in FIG. 3B), NOT being monitored by theSTAN_(—)2 system (through use of uploading CFi's and CVi's). Nonethelessthere is detection (e.g., by spyware program 132 s) of external materialwhich could be of value to a particular TC or TCONE (e.g., 115 x of FIG.1A) from which TC/TCONE (e.g., 216 c) this unmonitored entity (e.g.,Thomas 132 u 2 or CPAP 116 a, a.k.a. CPAP 117) was originally launched.In the case of the unmonitored human agent (e.g., Thomas) thecross-pollination data (262/264/252) was collected by means of a timelyand automatically presented survey proposal (e.g., 320 of FIG. 3B) whichthe unmonitored human agent (e.g., Thomas) agreed to respond to eitherimmediately then (e.g., in FIGS. 3B, 3C and 3D—where FIG. 3D will bedescribed shortly) or at a later time (e.g., by pressing Remind Mebutton 318 d′).

Next, in the here overviewed process, the survey responses automaticallycame back to the TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 n or 216 c) of origin of thesurveyed person (e.g., Thomas). The survey-answering responses containedinformation (physical data signals) which allowed the survey-answeringresponses to be tested for cross-correlation with expansion/evolutionneeds or desires of the returned-to TC or TCONE (216 n or 216 c). Thoseexpansion/evolution needs or desires may include, but are not limitedto, a desire to attach new keywords (e.g., 323″), new tags or meta-tags(e.g., 324″), new hyperlinks (e.g., 325″), new images (not shown),and/or identifications of new external platform users (e.g., usr3 ofFIG. 3C) to database records of the STAN_(—)2 system that define or areotherwise logically linked to the returned-to TC or TCONE (216 n) sothat the value and/or up-to-datedness of the absorbing TC or TCONE isenhanced. Those expansion/evolution needs or desires of the launcher TCor TCONE (e.g., 216 c) may further include, but are not limited to, adesire to detect and possibly link to (261) external platform NotesExchange sessions (e.g., 226) and/or external platform Notes Exchanginggroups or individuals (e.g., 224) whose current topics of interest mayclosely overlap with current topics of interest of the returned-to TC orTCONE (216 n) or with current topics of interest of STAN_(—)2 users(e.g., 212) who reference the returned-to TC or TCONE (216 c).

In terms of a more concrete and specific example, suppose that in-STANuser 212 operates his local data processing device (e.g., 132 a, or itsremotely instantiated equivalent) to navigate via a browse connectionlike 218 (see also 315 e of FIG. 3A) to a corresponding TC or TCONErepresented by circle 216 n of FIG. 2. Suppose further that in-STAN user212 is also (perhaps in an alter ego form) a member of external platformdiscussion group 223. But this user 212 (a.k.a. member of 224) does notyet know about the existence of external discussion group 223 onexternal platform 220. Suppose however, that when in-STAN user 212 isbrowsing about TC or TCONE 216 n, he discovers the cross-pollinationlink 261 back to not only external platform node 226 and perhaps fromthere back to external discussion group 224 (if platform 220 allows theSTAN_(—)2 system 210 to obtain back link 228 from 226 to 224) but alsohe discovers other cross-pollination link (not 261) from TC 216 n backto yet another external discussion group 223 of external platform 220.

As a result of this activity, the in-STAN user 212 who (perhaps in analter ego form) is a member of external platform discussion group 224has used the topic center (TC) based data structure of the STAN_(—)2system to locate overlapping discussion group 223 (or its node similarto 226 but not referenced) on the external platform 220 where beforehanduser 212 was not aware of the same; even though discussion groups 223and 224 are on the same external platform 220 and share at least sometopic of common interest!

The reason that members of discussion groups like 223 and 224 may notknow of each other's existence is because the discussion groups space225 of external platform 220 is flat. Notes Exchange sessions (e.g.,discussion threads) are not logically tethered or hooped to a commontopic center (topic node) in external space 225. Accordingly, a firstdiscussion by members of discussion group 224 may take place in node 226and may center on Topic ‘A’ (assume for the moment it is also the topicof STAN_(—)2 TC or TCONE 216 n) while another discussion by members ofdiscussion group 223 may simultaneously take place in a spaced apartnode (far from 226) in flat space 225 and may also center on the sameTopic ‘A’ and nonetheless members of discussion groups 223 and 224 maynot know of each other and of their concurrent overlapping interest in asame topic (e.g., ‘A’). This is so because discussion groups space 225is flat and its Notes Exchange sessions (e.g., rings) are dispersedabout that flat space in an often non-topical manner (e.g.,chronologically ordered). It may very well be that one or more membersof discussion groups 223 and 224 may greatly benefit from being joined(electronically or otherwise) with a member or more of the other group.The presence of a commonly linking and on-topic, topic center like 216 nof the STAN_(—)2 system 220 makes such cross discussion grouppollination possible. Although FIG. 2 shows just one logical link 261being established between in-STAN node 216 n and out-of-STAN node 226,it should be apparent now that, just like a first go-between CPAP 260 orCPUP (e.g., Thomas) helped create cross-platform link 261 between nodes216 n and 226, yet other go-between CPAP's 260 or CPUP's would likelycreate a cross-platform link (like 261) between in-STAN node 216 n andthe other out-of-STAN node (not 226) whose members (223) are discussingthe very same topic ‘A’. Thus the STAN_(—)2 system can serve as aintermediating or joining mechanism that allows external but separateddiscussion groups (e.g., 223, 224) on a same external platform (e.g.,220) or even sometimes on different external platforms (e.g., 146, 147,depending on usage restrictions of the external platforms) to join withone another when they have a common topic of interest (e.g., Topic ‘A’).In other words, thanks to the cross-platform cross-pollinationactivities of go-between CPAP's (e.g., 260) or CPUP's (e.g., Thomas 132u 2), joinder of persons having a common topic of interest can takeplace as between members of external platforms as long as one of themembers is a STAN_(—)2 user (e.g., 212) who takes advantage of theSTAN_(—)2 browsing function that allows STAN_(—)2 user (e.g., 212) tobrowse within the STAN_(—)2 topic space 215.

By the same token, members of different groups (e.g., 213, 214) in theSTAN_(—)2 membership space 211 may be connected with one another when amember of a first of the groups visits the common topic center (TC,e.g., 219 a) and learns of the existence of and common topic of interestby the other group.

Referring to FIG. 3D, aspects thereof will now be described in greaterdetail. The higher and/or emotive/social intelligences (IQs) of thehuman volunteer (Thomas) may be exploited more fully with thenonlimiting further examples given in FIG. 3D (screen 303). Firstly, thespyware program 132 s may pop up a synopsis requesting, data entry boxlike 329. Originally, and in one embodiment, this box 329 issubstantially empty except that it starts with the suggestive text: “Mysynopsis of this node is:”. Then the volunteer (e.g., Thomas) fills inthe rest. For example, he provides a definition “A5” of what he thinksthe topic is and as set of aspect definitions X1, X2 which he believesare aspects of the so defined topic. Next he identifies the topic ordiscussion group leaders by their user names as they appear in thehighlighted external platform transcript area 317′″. In one embodiment,he can simply drag-and-drop any desired user name (e.g., UsrNm5 at 323d′″) from out of external platform transcript area 317′″ and into any ofhis response areas including synopsis-providing area 329 and/or votingareas under request 322′″. Additionally, in the exemplary synopsisproviding area 329, the volunteer is show to have identified a keyoutside content source (URL6/A5.11) that he believes to be the mainfocal point of the discussion group at this time.

In an alternate embodiment, the spyware program 132 s may providetemplate cues in synopsis providing area 329 for the volunteer tocomplete. They may be similar to but perhaps not as smooth flowing asthe illustrated response in FIG. 3D of the user's typed (and copy andpasted) synopsis 329. For example, a more heavily cued synopsis templatemay still include the introduction line but with further hints such as:“My synopsis of what is happening in this node (URL.com/A5) is asfollows:”, where this is followed by a next line, “The primary topic is(fill in the blank, or accept default answer). The next more heavilycued template line after that may say: “A secondary or subsidiary topicbeing discussed here is (fill in the blank, or accept default answer).This may be followed by: “Major aspects of the primary or secondarytopics are: (fill in the blank, or accept default answers). This may befollowed by: “The top 2 or 3 contributors to this discussion group are:(fill in the blank, or accept default answers).” This may be followedby: “The top 2 or 3 outside news or other articles we are discussingare: (fill in the blank, or accept default answers).” And so on; as maybe appropriate for the nature of the highlighted Notes Exchange session317′″.

In the exemplary voting area, a first proposed voting request 323′″ mayask the volunteer (Thomas) to identify who he thinks (IMHO) are the most“popular” personas in the highlighted Notes Exchange session 317′″. Analternate choice tool (down triangle) in the attribute describing box(illustrated as showing “POPULAR”) allows the volunteer to change it toshow a different attribute. Originally some of the answers in vote line323′″ are prefilled with default answers guessed at by the spywareprogram 132 s based on what currently appears inside the highlightedNotes Exchange session 317′″. The human volunteer (Thomas) may of coursechange these selections by picking from readily available drop-out menusor by way of a drag-and-drop operation (e.g., 336 e′″).

In the exemplary voting area, a next proposed voting request 324′″ mayask the volunteer (Thomas) to identify who he thinks (IMHO—In My HumbleOpinion) are the most “influential” personas in the highlighted NotesExchange session 317′″. Once again, the user can alter the votingquestion and/or the default provided answers. Generally, the first fewpresented voting questions will be relatively easier to answer and thenif the volunteer so chooses, he can use scroll down tool 327′″ to scrolldown to more difficult or complex questions about social interactionsthat the volunteer sees or feels as occurring within the highlightedNotes Exchange session 317′″. The more difficult or complex questionsmay include: who in your opinion are the top three captains of thisNotes Exchange session (in order, 1, 2, 3)?; who in your opinion are thetop three mutineers of this Notes Exchange session (in order, 1, 2, 3)?;who in your opinion are the top three Tipping Point Mavens of this NotesExchange session (in order, 1, 2, 3)?; who in your opinion are the topthree Tipping Point Salesmen of this Notes Exchange session (in order,1, 2, 3)?; who in your opinion are the top three Tipping PointConnectors of this Notes Exchange session (in order, 1, 2, 3)?; and soon. At any time after having responded to as few or as many vote-likequestions about the highlighted Notes Exchange session 317′″, the usermay hit the Exit Survey Button 326 b″ and thus cast whatever votes hehas checked and end the survey session. It is within the contemplationof the disclosure that the survey-taking panes like 320 b (FIG. 3C) and320 c (FIG. 3D) may provide answering opportunities in other formatsbesides check boxes; fill in the blanks format for example. When theExit Survey Button 326 b″ is virtually depressed, the spyware program132 s records all the answers given by the volunteer and packages thesame for transmittal back to the STAN_(—)2 system along with otherappropriate information such as the ID of the volunteer, the time anddate of the survey, the identification of the highlighted Notes Exchangesession 317′″ and perhaps samples of content found therein, the synopsis329 provided by the volunteer and other useful survey data as deemedappropriate for the nature of the surveyed volunteer and the nature ofthe highlighted Notes Exchange session 317′″ over which he is beingsurveyed.

In one embodiment, the spyware program 132 s also provides the volunteerwith highlighting tools such as the illustrated 325″ whereby the usercan elect to temporarily or more permanently highlight various internalobjects within the highlighted Notes Exchange session 317′″. This mayinclude adding differently colored highlightings to different user namesper illustrated options 325 a, 325 b and picking different other objects(e.g., keywords, unburied tags, buried but temporarily unburiedmeta-tags like in 317 a′ and so on) to differentially highlight thesewith desired colors and/or texturings per the illustrated OTHR option.

While in one embodiment, Lurking BOT's are expected to behave as ifflies on the wall at the external platforms and not to activelyparticipate in discussion group exchanges of external platforms, in someembodiments, Lurking BOT's and the like are instantiated so that they dointeract, at least in the role of survey takers that ask questionssimilar to those asked of the STAN-REP in FIGS. 3B-3D. In someinstances, Lurking BOT's may launch their own discussion group proposals(e.g., solo-launched ring 206 of plane 221) where the BOT-launchedproposal is in the form of a survey-taking opening question such as:With regard to sub-topic D2, who in your opinion are the mostinfluential participants in this (lurked at) discussion group? Theresponses, if any, are then fed back as CFi's to the STAN_(—)2 DLUXserver(s).

Referring to FIG. 4A, when large numbers of presented cross-pollinationdata packages (pCPD 262/264/252) are returned to the hive from thevarious, reporting in CPUPs (e.g., Thomas) and or Search-BOTS it can beoverwhelming for system resources and/or vote eligible members ofreceiving TC's or TCONE's (e.g., 216 c) to individually process eachpresented CPD package. An automated process 401 by way of which pCPDpackages can be more efficiently selectively absorbed and/or rejectedwill now be explained with reference to FIG. 4A.

Step 410 (Begin) is repeatedly activated as data processing bandwidthallows. In step 411 each received pCPD package is given a unique (buttemporary) identification number and stored in system memory for furtherprocessing. These unique (but temporary) identification numbers willfollow each of to be broken-apart pieces of the each package (whichhappens in 416) so that proper weighting can occur in to be performedstep 418. In step 412, and as data processing bandwidth allows, theinternal contents of the buffered pCPD packages are automaticallyvalidated and/or repaired. Validation may include verifying that thereporting back CPUP or CPAP is a valid one and not a transmissiondamaged or spoofed one and verifying that various URL's provided thereinare valid ones and not pointing to inappropriate content and verifyingthat various keywords or other encodings provided therein are correctlyspelled and do not present inappropriate content. The automated fixingoperation may include repairing spelling errors or machine-detectablegrammatical errors in the user's synopsis and so on.

Step 414 sorts the validated and repaired CPD's are hierarchicallysorted according to their TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 c) of launched origin.The hierarchy is according to that currently used in the STAN_(—)2 topicspace 215. In this way the otherwise randomly received CPD's are nowcollected into groups for respective processing according to the desiresor needs or nature of the TC's or TCONE's (e.g., 216 c) into which theymay be ultimately absorbed (or not).

Step 416 parses apart the CPD package pieces according to type (e.g.,keywords, tags, external user names, etc.) while retaining for eachparsed piece the temporary ID provided at step 411 and stores the parsedpieces (or pointers to them or tokens representing them) in an orderlymanner as shown by table structures 477-479. In other words, the storagescheme indicates which parsed pieces are being presented for votingthereon and/or for automated filtering (by buffer layer 216 b) for thewhole TC and then for individual TCONE's that are hooped on or primarilytethered to that TC.

In step 418, pre-voting weights are logically attached to the parsedpieces. The weighting scheme may vary and may be based on theidentification of the carrier (CPAP or CPUP) who brought the package, onthe identification of the external platform from where the packagecontents were obtained or derived, on the identification of certaininfluential (e.g., TPP's) persons with whom some of the package piecesare linked to, and so on.

In pre-voting step 421 the respectively weighted and parsed pieces ofeach sorted storage bin of storage structures 477, 478, 479, etc. aresummed, first as for each individual topic center node or TCONE and thenfor the hierarchically overlying parent node.

In step 423, votes on the weighted sums are carried out, first on thebasis of the child topic nodes or TCONE's and then for each successivelyhigher topic node in the topics tree as deemed appropriate. The numberof times that a same keyword, tag, etc., has been presented forabsorption counts on a one-to-one basis in this particular voting form.If frequency of presentation is not to be evaluated on a one-to-onebasis, then a count of redundant keywords, tags, etc. may first be takenand the counts may adjusted on a non-linear basis whereafter the countsare used as further weights and redundant copies of same keywords, tags,etc. are deleted before the vote is taken.

In step 423, it is determined which of the presented cross-pollinationdata pieces (keywords, tags, etc.) are not new for each respective,potential recipient (TC or TCONE) listed in table structures 477, 478,479, etc. Although a given keyword, tag, etc. may not be novel for afirst TC or TCONE, it may nonetheless be novel for a sibling suchentity. In one embodiment, the weightings ascribed in step 418 (andoptionally in step 423) vary as a function of which TC or TCONE theoffering is being presented to for possible absorption. In oneembodiment, after a first voted is taken on behalf of each TC or TCONE,a second round of voting is carried out for those potentially acceptingTC's or TCONE's where the offering is novel (as determined within step424 for example) and where the second round of voting is a function ofvoting results generated by sibling TC's or TCONE's. Then after thefirst and/or second rounds of voting complete, the sorted and parsedofferings are ranked according to their respective votes and in step425, those meeting or exceeding predetermined thresholds of therespective TC's or TCONE's are absorbed and logically positioned atinner core or more outer ranking rings (see 216 c of FIG. 2) of therespectively absorbing TC's or TCONE's. The acceptance and rejectionresults are fedback as genetic affirmations or reducers for the missionguiding data structures (i.e. 116 d′ of FIG. 4 c) so that a next roundof instantiated and launched BOT's will tend to get more affirmationsand less reducers. As mentioned above, in one embodiment it is possiblefor rejecting TC's or TCONE's to cast Reject-But votes whereafter thepackage contents of a rejected BOT (e.g., 253 a of FIG. 2) arere-directed to another data processing mechanism that uses theReject-But contents 254 a to build a brand new topic node (e.g., 216 n).

Referring to FIG. 4B, it will now be described how the mission guidingdata structures (i.e. 116 d′) of TC or TCONE-Serving BOT's may beinstantiated prior to launch. Machine-implemented and automated process402 begins at step 430. At step 431, a unique ID is assigned by theSTAN_(—)2 system to the to-be-launched CPAP (a.k.a. BOT).

At step 432, the identification of the TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 c) onwhose behalf the BOT is to be launched, is obtained and logically linkedto the being instantiated mission guiding data structure (i.e. 116 d′).At step 433, the so-called Top N_(i) topic defining encodings of theidentified launch pad (TC or TCONE) of step 432 are fetched. Here N_(i)may vary for each type of topic defining encoding, be it a keyword, atag, a meta-tag and so on. More specifically, N_(i) might be Top 3 forkeywords but at the same time Top 5 for tags. Also the definition ofwhat is meant by “Top” can vary on an encoding type by encoding typebasis. “Top” may mean most often repeated irrespective of which launchpad user is repeating it. On the other hand, “Top” may alternativelymean used by the greatest number of unique members within the TCONE orby the greatest number of TCONE's primarily owned by a launching TC.“Top” may yet alternatively mean that it is rated as such by one or moreinfluential members (e.g., TPP's) within the TC or TCONE (e.g., 216 c)or that a largest number of such influential members use it. These arenonlimiting examples of how the definition of “Top N” can be variedaside from the value of N also being varied.

At step 434, a similar process is undertaken for so-called pointers (P)that are going to direct the to be launched BOT as to where in the vastlandscape of the Internet 101 to search. Generally the plurality of Ppointers are URL's taken respectively from the launch point (could be aTC or a TCONE) and its ancestors (e.g., parent, grandparent TC's). Onceagain, the definition of “Top P” can be varied and aside from that thevalue of P also being varied on a contributor by contributor basis. Inother words, “Top P” for BOT launching child need not mean the samething or have same value P as “Top P” for the parent of grandparent nodeof the BOT launching child.

After the potential search areas have been identified in step 434 asbeing the respective “Top P” pointers of respective child and/or parentand/or grandparent node, corresponding behavior rules (see also 499 ofFIG. 4C) are fetched in step 435 a. These behavior rules instruct theBOT (after it is instantiated and launched) how to behave when itarrives and begins searching or lurking at a target site on an externalplatform. Should it operate as a lurking and unseen watcher and gathereror as a more active survey taker? What special navigation steps does itneed to exercise if at all when using the public interface provided bythe external platform? Does it first have to sign in and provide a validpassword? Does it have to navigate to a particular “wall” or “discussiongroup” or other such construct of the being-visited external platform?Does it have to follow special protocols in order to join new groupswithin the being-visited external platform? Does it have to dress in aspecial avatar uniform that is prescribed by the being-visited externalplatform for NPC's? Questions like these and the alike are accounted forby the fetched behavior rules of each targeted external platform areathat is to be searched by the BOT and/or lurked at.

In subsequent step 435 b, the “Top Q” drift direction encodings of thelaunching pad TC or TCONE are fetched. Once again, the definition of“Top Q” can be varied and aside from that the value of Q also beingvaried on a contributor by contributor basis. The drift directionencodings may indicate to the Search BOT what variations from the Top Ntopic definitions of step 433 should be pursued when searching for freshcross-pollination material. As mentioned earlier, each TC or TCONE mayhave its most dominant “captain” type members who are trying to keep theboat moored to one place in topic space 215 or are trying to keep theboat drifting in a captain-preferred direction. On the other hand, thesame figurative boat (it could be TCONE or TC in this case) may have itsmost dominant “mutineer” type members who are trying to change theboat's primary mooring and/or are trying to change the boat's driftdirection to a new direction other than the captain(s)-preferreddirection. The fetched “Top Q” drift direction encodings (they could betags, meta-tags, URL's etc.) may those of the captains and/or of themutineers.

In subsequent step 436, a template mission guiding data structure isfetched from a library of such structures stored and maintained by theSTAN_(—)2 system. The template mission guiding data structure has afoundational structure for defining a search strategy, but it does nothave the variables defined by the “Top N”, “Top P” and/or “Top Q”permanently encoded therein. Accordingly at step 436, the results ofsteps 433-435 b are appropriately inserted into respective blank ordefault-wise pre-specified spots of the fetched template mission guidingdata structure. Optionally, a so-called augmenting step (which will bedetailed in conjunction with FIG. 4C) may be carried out within step436. The filled-in and optionally augmented template mission guidingdata structure is then compiled to thereby instantiate the missionguiding data structure (i.e. 116 d′ of FIG. 4B). Dashed association path486 indicates that the corresponding BOT is now tagged with itslaunching pad TC-of-origin or TCONE-of-origin identification data (perassociation paths 481 and 482) and with its instantiated the missionguiding data structure (i.e. 116 d′), where the latter may guide (dashedpath 484) to search area 225′ and/or more specifically, into discussionring 226′ of an identified external platform (e.g., 220).

If not yet done in step 436, in subsequent step 437, the instantiatedmission guiding data structure is logically linked to a correspondingand instantiated BOT agent (software agent) and they are activated,thereby launching them (metaphorically) on their virtual journey throughthe Internet so as to search in and/or lurk in the targeted externalterritory (e.g., discussion ring 226′).

Step 438 tasks the STAN_(—)2 operating system with periodic checking inon the health and mission progress of the launched BOT. If the launchedBOT freezes up for any reason, the STAN_(—)2 operating system may try tounfreeze it, and if not successful, the STAN_(—)2 operating system mayalternatively launch another copy of the previously launched BOT.

In step 439 a periodic test is undertaken to see how far along in itsmission the launched BOT is, with this being weighed against possibleurgency pings for returned content, where the urgency pings may comefrom members of the launching pad TC or TCONE, who by their uploadedCFi's and/or CV's may be indicating a desire to see fresh new materialwhich the launched BOT is expected to bring back from its respectivelytargeted search zone (e.g., discussion ring 226′).

In step 441, it is periodically determined if the mission appears to becomplete or if urgency for incomplete results exceeds a predeterminedthreshold. If yes, the launched BOT is recalled back to the hive (step445). If no, the BOT is allowed to remain lurking or searching in itsrespectively targeted search zone (e.g., discussion ring 226′) a littlebit longer.

Referring to FIG. 4C, now details of one automated process 403 forgenetically mutating the mission guiding data structures (i.e. 116 d′)will be described. Search and lurk BOT's that persistently return pCPD'swhose contents are all rejected are re-instantiated at progressivelydecreasing rates over time until their populations die out if notsuccess is attained. Search and lurk BOT's that receive acceptances arere-instantiated more often, but nonetheless competition is maintained asbetween different strains of BOT's that service a same launching pad TCor TCONE so that the more successful BOT's are rewarded with increasedor sustained populations. That said, at the same time in one embodiment,mutations of both successful and unsuccessful BOT's are alsoinstantiated and launched so as to provide a potentially wider varietyof cross-pollination material.

In FIG. 4C, mission guiding data structure 116 d′ represents the virtualDNA of a corresponding successful BOT (one whose pCPD was at leastpartially accepted). In step 451 (after begin step 450 ofmachine-implemented and automated process 403 is carried out) the oldvirtual DNA of the corresponding successful BOT is read out. Dashed path491 a also represents this reading of old DNA process.

In step 452 the values of one or more of the old virtual DNA parametersare varied either randomly or semi-randomly, where semi-randomlyindicates that additional steps are taken to more intelligently decidewhich of the old virtual DNA parameters are to be varied and if so towhat extent and in what direction, increasing or decreasing? The moreintelligent decision making may be based on trends uncovered in previoustrial and error, random mutations. In step 453, a similar mutation isundertaken for definitions of Top Xi, where Xi can be Ni, Pi, Qi oranother like parameter. In one variation, one of steps 452 and 453 isoccasionally bypassed. In step 454, the old search algorithm is alsorandomly or semi-randomly varied. For example, a previously usedcombinatorial search specification (e.g., (A OR B) AND C AND (NotD)) isvaried slightly as to its named variables and/or utilized logicaloperators and/or their order of evaluation. As another example, apreviously used cross-correlation search specification (e.g., one thatattributes weights for cross-correlations of respective keywords and/ortags) where weights are varied and/or thresholds are varied. After theresults of steps 451-454 are obtained a new template mission guidingdata structure is filled in with the mutated results in step 455 a ofFIG. 4D.

Before explaining FIG. 4D, a recap is provided here of the possiblemutations to old mission guiding data structure 116 d′ before it isre-instantiated as mutated and launched new item 116 d″. The one or morevariables that can be mutated include: 1) What is value of N_(i),N_(i+1) (of parent), N_(i+2) (of grandparent node), etc.?; 2) What ismeaning of “Top” when a “Top X_(i)” is specified?; 3) What augmentationsare to be added into table column 496 of table data structure 490 ofFIG. 4C?; 4) What is the logic (see again step 454) of the searchalgorithm?; 5) When performing the search in a target area, is thesearch BOT to spiral (116 s) inwardly from a more general and widersearch area to a more specific and thus narrower search area or, viseversa, spiral out from specific destination 116 s 1 to a more generaland thus wider outer orbital 116 s 3 when searching in targeted externalplatform space 225″?. As may be appreciated, there is some overlapbetween the steps shown in FIG. 4B (see 436, 437) and steps shown incombined FIGS. 4C-4D.

Referring to step 456 of FIG. 4D and also to corresponding Lookup Table(LUT) 406 of FIG. 4C, there may be instances in which better searchresults (e.g., higher rated pCPD's) are obtained if the topic definingencodings obtained directly from the launching pad TC or TCONE and/or itancestor(s) (Parent, Grandparent, etc.) are augmented with additionalsuch encodings. The case where a search into a foreign language ormulti-language target zone is to be conducted by a BOT has already beendiscussed above. Thus the benefit of using a native-to foreign languageLUT 406 b to insert equivalent foreign language augmentations (e.g., 407a) for the native language encodings obtained directly from thelaunching pad TC or TCONE should now be apparent. Moreover, the casewhere a search into a different disciplinary area (e.g., from computerscience Man Month to economics counterpart) has already been discussedabove. Thus the benefit of using a Frame1-to-Frame2 Rosetta Stone likeLUT 406 c to inserting equivalent augmentations as used in a differentbut nonetheless related disciplinary area should now be apparent. Bysimilar token there may synonyms and/or antonyms provided from aThesaurus-like LUT 406 a that can provide useful augmentations. Forexample, sometimes it is beneficial to search for the opposite of agiven original encoding. Of course the outputs of Thesaurus-like LUT 406a may be subsequently passed through LUT's 406 b and/or 406 c so as toobtain yet further augmentations. One of the mutation driven variablesmay be a variable number specifying how many augmentations are to beused in step 456.

Referring to step 458 of FIG. 4D and also to corresponding data transferflow 408 of FIG. 4C, the combination of (or a selected subcombinationthereof) of the directly obtained topic defining encodings and theiraugmentations are inserted into corresponding fill-in blanks of theoptionally mutated search algorithms in column 497 d of table datastructure 497. (Mutation of the optionally mutated search algorithms wasdescribed as being optionally carried out in step 454.)

Column 497 b of table data structure 497 was filled in with the TopP_(i), P_(i+1), P_(i+2), etc. pointers of the respective child launchingpad TC or TCONE and its ancestors after step 453 completed. Thereafter,a second set of augmenting LUTs 498 may be used to add respectiveaugmenting pointers by reading in the Top P_(i), P_(i+1), P_(i+2), etc.pointers of the respective child launching pad TC or TCONE and itsancestors via intake path 498 i and outputting corresponding augmentingpointers via output path 4980. The output augmentations 498 o (which arestored into column 497 c) can be ones that were elsewhere in theSTAN_(—)2 system determined to provide alternate websites and/or othercontent sources that are relatively similar, but not entirely the sameas the corresponding input ones (498 i) of LUTs set 498.

After columns 497 b and 497 c of table data structure 497 are filled in,they are used to fetch the appropriate behavior guidelines and rules 499for the to-be instantiated and launched BOT. As mentioned above, theguidelines and rules 499 instruct the instructable BOT how to functionand behave when operating in the domain of external space 225″. In someinstances, behavior protocol may require the BOT to seek assistance of aSTAN-REP such as 132″ for letting the BOT in through a limited entrydoor of the targeted space 225″. Of course cooperation agreements withoperators of the external platform may need to be reached before some ofthese activities can be undertaken.

For sake of completion, FIG. 4D also shows the compile and launch step459 and the periodic health check up step 460 for the launched BOT.

The present disclosure is to be taken as illustrative rather than aslimiting the scope, nature, or spirit of the subject matter claimedbelow. Numerous modifications and variations will become apparent tothose skilled in the art after studying the disclosure, including use ofequivalent functional and/or structural substitutes for elementsdescribed herein, use of equivalent functional couplings for couplingsdescribed herein, and/or use of equivalent functional steps for stepsdescribed herein. Such insubstantial variations are to be consideredwithin the scope of what is contemplated here. Moreover, if pluralexamples are given for specific means, or steps, and extrapolationbetween and/or beyond such given examples is obvious in view of thepresent disclosure, then the disclosure is to be deemed as effectivelydisclosing and thus covering at least such extrapolations.

By way of example, it is understood that the configuring of a userpossessed data processing device (e.g., 131 a, 131 b of FIG. 1A) toprovide a user interface for interfacing with the STAN_(—)2 system inaccordance with the present disclosure (e.g., in accordance with FIGS.3A-3D) can include use of a remote computer or network subsystem and itsrespective software (e.g., 110 of FIG. 1A and its downloadable spywareprogram 132 s) to carry out download of and activation of interfacingsoftware into the user possessed data processing device (e.g., 131 a,131 b. A computer-readable tangible medium (e.g., hard disk, opticaldisk, flash drive etc.) or another form of a software product ormachine-instructing means (including but not limited to a downloading of(or in-loading of) manufactured instructing signals over a network(e.g., 101) may be used for instructing an instructable machine (e.g.,132 a, 132 b) belonging to a user or to system operators to carry outvarious activities described herein, where the activities can includeselective activation of one or more of various user interface functionsdescribed herein as being provided to users of the STAN_(—)2 systemand/or as being provided to its system operators. As such, it is withinthe scope of the disclosure to have an instructable machine carry out,and/to provide a software product adapted for causing an instructablemachine to carry out machine-implemented methods that use encodings of auser's physical and/or logical environment to automatically determinemost probable topics of interest on that user's mind, to automaticallydetermine what other users and/or content sources the SS2 user iscurrently co-compatible with and to accordingly and automaticallyprovide the SS2 user with content source recommendations in accordancewith those determinations.

Reservation of Extra-Patent Rights, Resolution of Conflicts, andInterpretation of Terms

After this disclosure is lawfully published, the owner of the presentpatent application has no objection to the reproduction by others oftextual and graphic materials contained herein provided suchreproduction is for the limited purpose of understanding the presentdisclosure of invention and of thereby promoting the useful arts andsciences. The owner does not however disclaim any other rights that maybe lawfully associated with the disclosed materials, including but notlimited to, copyrights in any computer program listings or art works orother works provided herein, and to trademark or trade dress rights thatmay be associated with coined terms or art works provided herein and toother otherwise-protectable subject matter included herein or otherwisederivable herefrom.

If any disclosures are incorporated herein by reference and suchincorporated disclosures conflict in part or whole with the presentdisclosure, then to the extent of conflict, and/or broader disclosure,and/or broader definition of terms, the present disclosure controls. Ifsuch incorporated disclosures conflict in part or whole with oneanother, then to the extent of conflict, the later-dated disclosurecontrols.

Unless expressly stated otherwise herein, ordinary terms have theircorresponding ordinary meanings within the respective contexts of theirpresentations, and ordinary terms of art have their correspondingregular meanings within the relevant technical arts and within therespective contexts of their presentations herein. Descriptions aboveregarding related technologies are not admissions that the technologiesor possible relations between them were appreciated by artisans ofordinary skill in the areas of endeavor to which the present disclosuremost closely pertains.

Given the above disclosure of general concepts and specific embodiments,the scope of protection sought is to be defined by the claims appendedhereto. The issued claims are not to be taken as limiting Applicant'sright to claim disclosed, but not yet literally claimed subject matterby way of one or more further applications including those filedpursuant to 35 U.S.C. §120 and/or 35 U.S.C. §251.

What is claimed is:
 1. A cross-pollination urging method for use with aSocial-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN) system and with externalplatform systems, where the STAN system maintains a topic spacepopulated by unique topic nodes each having topic defining datalogically linked thereto, the method comprising: instantiating asoftware agent (e.g., BOT) that is structured to convey potentially newor different, and thus potentially cross-pollinating data signals to theSTAN system; causing the instantiated software agent to begin collectingfrom the one or more external platform systems, potentially new ordifferent, and thus potentially cross-pollinating data; and causing theinstantiated software agent to begin conveying collected potentially newor different, and thus potentially cross-pollinating data ascorresponding data signals to the STAN system.
 2. A machine-implemented,user interface structured to provide a corresponding user with contentsource recommendations corresponding to topics of interest that areprobably currently on the user's mind, said interface comprising: (a) acontent source recommendation presenting mechanism that can present oneor more recommendation-representing objects to the user that areuser-activatable and which, when activated by the user will connect theuser virtually to corresponding on-topic content, where therecommendation-representing objects indicate at least one of: (a.1) thetopic of the content source that is being recommended by the object,(a.2) the platform from which the on-topic content of the object isbeing obtained; (a.3) a topic center to which the on-topic content ofthe object is logically linked; (a.4) one or more persons to which theon-topic content of the object is logically linked; (a.5) one or moremembership groups to which the on-topic content of the object islogically linked; (a.6) a current temperature of an attribute of theobject; (a.7) a Notes Exchange type that the on-topic content of theobject has; and (a.8) a launchable search BOT that can be launched froma topic node to which the on-topic content of the object is logicallylinked.
 3. The machine-implemented, user interface of claim 2 whereinthe launchable search BOT launches from a node in a cross-pollinatedtopic space of a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking (STAN) system withwhich said user interface interfaces.
 4. The machine-implemented, userinterface of claim 2 wherein the topic center indicating object is useractivatable and when activated provides the user with a browsing view ofa corresponding neighborhood of a corresponding topic center in across-pollinated topic space of a Social-Topical Adaptive Networking(STAN) system with which said user interface interfaces.
 5. Amachine-assisted process of obtaining one or more answers to questionsof potentially esoteric nature, the method comprising: (a) submitting aquestion to a STAN_(—)2 system question processing program; (b)interacting with the question processing program so as to converge onone or more topic centers in STAN_(—)2 topic space whose respectivetopic or topics are well connected with a topic intended by the posedquestion; (c) receiving from the system question processing program alist of Tipping Point Mavens or other consensus-wise elected experts whoare logically linked to the converged upon one or more topic centers andwhose works of expertise match one or more of keywords, tags and/or URLsassociated with the posed question; (d) picking a subset of the listedexperts; and (e) automatically forwarding the posed question to theselected subset of experts.